Right visual field to left hemisphere. Why?

F. Frank LeFever flefever at ix.netcom.com
Wed Oct 14 23:36:51 EST 1998



re final line: yes, enough said.  You do qualify as a kccheng clone.



In <362529BC.9E0925DF at pop3.concentric.net> kkollins at pop3.concentric.net
writes: 
>
>[A General "Policy" Statement]
>
>re.:
>
>>>1980.<<
>
>This was a ms. titled, "The Fundamental Wisdom of Biological Brains"
(as
>opposed to machine "brains"), and, in it, the decussation "Rossetta
Stone", and
>minimization principle that permeates nervous systems and integrates
their
>functioning were  first disclosed. It was self-published. My treatment
of
>hippocampal dynamics in this paper fell short of the mark.
>
>Before the 1980 paper, I'd been working on the problem since Sept.
1971, and
>had produced 12-15 shorter papers. After 1980 paper, I continued, and
produced
>a major paper in 1986, "Why, Human Behavior", which was rewritten and
presented
>at a meeting given, by the International General Semantics
gorganization, in
>space rented at Yale in August, 1988. That paper is titled, "On the
Automation
>of Knowing within Central Nervous Systems" (AoK). In this paper, the
>functioning of all the major nuclear groups of the brain is
integrated, and the
>same is done in a more-general way for the whole CNS (I wanted to
focus upon
>higher-level considerations). The paper contains concrete biological
mechanisms
>which account "completely" (in that there are no "gaps", but not in
that there
>remains nothing more to say), for the phenomena of creativity,
curiosity and
>volition, among other things... and it discloses the biological
wellspring of
>"prejudice", including the "nationalism" that leads to war, and which
has, in
>recent memory, so Horrifically filled our media-bourne minds with
awareness of
>the savagery that stems from "prejudice" (just yesterday, strong minds
and
>wills prevailed, with respect to the same, in Kosovo... HURRAH!!!).
Another
>paper on the same theme was produced in 1988, again using the title,
"Why:
>Human Behavior". It was shorter than AoK, but discussed things from a
different
>perspective, and so, goes hand-in-hand with AoK.
>
>The "molecular" stuff of which I've spoken in prior msgs, is in
Physics, and is
>best dealt with in forums that make that subject their topic. I've
been trying
>to initiate enduring discussions in such places for a decade, but to
"no"
>avail. It's sorrowfully-humorous that, although I've been censored in
such
>places (in the end, almost before I was able to try to begin in this
or that
>formerly-untried place, which disclosed "priority" in recognition), my
work in
>Physics has, never-the-less, been winning awards right and left by
folks who've
>recognized it's stuff in their own past experimental and theoretical
endeavors
>where it had gone unregognized until I'd discussed its correlates in
my own
>work. (It's long been clear to me that there are some groups who've
vested
>interests in silencing me completely. All of this stuff, including the
route I
>followed, the blossoming of the concepts, and all of the references I
used, is
>documented, and I'll be happy to allow folks to draw their own
conclusions from
>such documentation.)
>
>My Purpose has been, from the beginning, to present a Gift of
Understanding to
>Folks who stand in need of such. This remains my Purpose.
>
>Because, however, it became clear, early on, that there were some who
were bent
>upon taking the understanding I'd developed, and "locking it away" as
"trade
>secrets", and other such "invisible"-to-the-general-Public "stuff", I
long ago
>saw the need for, and developed, a way to discuss things openly, while
>maintaining an unbreakable "key" to the whole body of understanding. I
did this
>so that I could continue to Pursue communication of the understanding
to those
>on whose behalves the work was initiated, and accomplished... folks
who
>Suffer-Greatly under the yoke of unwittingly-automated "Prejudice",
>most-significantly, battered Children. It remains my single Purpose to
achieve
>this communication. Because of matters I needn't get into, the need to
>communicate the "key" is hard upon me, and I'd like to do so in a
Public
>Science meeting. My only "condition" is that there be an adequate
(significant)
>representation of members of the groups for whom the work was
undertaken, and
>accomplished, in attendance (physically present) at that meeting. I
will,
>there, present the Gift of Understanding, well-prepared, to these
Folks. Then,
>in the Light of these Folks' unhindered Awareness and Endeavor,
Science, and
>everyone else, can do whatever they Choose to do. I will maintain all
of my
>Patent Rights, which are myriad, and assure that they are put to
best-use in
>Serving the General Good.
>
>And I'll have the Peace I've for which I've so-long yearned, and
probably go
>for "a walk in a park".
>
>Re. "kccheng..." Enough said? k. p. collins
>




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list