IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Mind a no-brainer?

Sir Knowitall fell_joinedby_in at one.net.au
Thu Jan 6 00:14:40 EST 2000

The NDT and the TD E/I min generalization is an over-generalization being
pushed overly much into the foreground (and is wanting of *being* a more
practically realizable/workable approach) in respect of endeavoring to
socially and psychologocally prevent "Ravagings". (Rest assure most people
have at least some idea of what you refer to by this your "poetry of pain".)

It is an over-generalization to the point being a far from optimal and
balanced approximation of What Is actually going on.

More specifically, part of why it falls short (in this respect) is that it
(you Ken) blatantly gives too little descriptive (theoretical) weight to the
super-(co)explanatory principle of Natural Selection.

Still more specifically, along with *not incorporating Evolution Theory
enough*, the "TD E/I min" (or TD E/I - up or down) is too blunt to properly
account for naturally selected-*in* developmentally timed and expressed
drives "à la a TD E/I up" ---- one of the most striking or fullest examples
of which is the life and behaviour of a rodent-like marsupial mammal of
Nothern Australian rainforests. Each mating season the male pursues the
female so "enthusiastically" (being an understatement) that he dies from a

So much for the "truth" -- or general explanatory relevance -- of the 2nd
law of thermodynamics in the realm of the *evolved* fauna (of course there
are none else) of which we are "merely" the most AEVASIVE of all species.

You ----(wonderfully talanted and basically it seems friendly and gentle
fellow -- but who show some signs of manic grandiosity and who, when some
accurate criticism is levelled at you, tend to show his claws in a way that
reminds sensitive associaters like myself of the behaviour of other "more
infamous" gurus who perceived that threat ideological "supremacy" was being
threatened)----- might consider that I (alias "Sir Knowitall";) am not
"what" is giving you the shits (even though, or rather, that I have offered
you the use of a concEPTual tool that can be spelt "SHITS", and that is part
of my *at least personally* comfortably settled-on (co-)Explanatory
Platform-Terminology --- of which "AEVASIVE" and "CURSES" are two other
concEPTual tools that **also seem to be too hard for you to digest**.

Not that it really matters to me all that much, but I shall exhort you for
one LAST TIME (because you and "your case" has touched me):

Get a hold of yourself, and carefully consider the advice that certain
largely well-meaning people in this NG have given you!

Best of luck!


kenneth Collins <kpaulc at earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3871B997.17753E8F at earthlink.net...
> damscot at my-deja.com wrote:
> > >[...]
> > First, I don't believe that "the brain " in any way
> > perceives itself as mind" at all. I did not state that it does. On the
> > contrary, I said: "If it did ..., then ..." a contradiction results.
> >
> > Lets try again. Let's say the brain does generate the mind; and that
> > mind then correctly perceives the brain which creates it.
> >
> > If this were true, then the brain would actually perceive itself (via
> > the mind which it generates.) This is what I mean by (directly). But,
> > again (if Kant is right
> 'right' about what, in particular?
> >), the mind would not know the truth about its
> > own brain which it perceives. Thus, in this sense, the mind must view
> > itself to be independent of it's brain. But we (our minds) already said
> > that it depends upon the brain for its very existance. Thus, it appears
> > we have some sort of inherent contradiction.
> i don't see this particular 'contradicton'.
> as Rudolfo Llinas says (paraphrase), "The universe is so big and the
> brain is so small."
> in other words, there's more in the Universe than there is in any brain.
> it's 'just' that both Universe and brain are rigorously-coupled to the
> same thing, the one-way flow of energy from order to disorder that is
> what's described by 2nd Thermo (wdb2t).
> so, although the brain is completely-dependent upon receiving the
> energy-flow that comes to it from the external environment, the brain,
> nevertheless, 'perceives' what's in the subset of the universal
> energy-flow that it receives.
> where folks get 'crossed-up' is in their 'thinking' that the subset of
> the universal energy-flow that they do 'receive' is 'all there is'
> within the Universe, even to the point of Ravaging others whose
> different 'perceptions' result from their having received different
> subsets of the universal energy-flow.
> Fixing this, and Eliminating its needless Ravaging of Humanity, are what
> Neuroscientific Duality Theory (NDT) is all about.
> although experiencing all of the universal energy-flow is Impossible for
> individuals' brains, NDT shows, nevertheless, that individuals' brains
> are rigorously-coupled with the entirety of the universal energy-flow,
> and, to the degree one does, in fact, experience the universal
> energy-flow, one is able to 'perceive' Truth.
> with respect to the position you've stated, the thing that Matters (as
> i've discussed in former msgs, and reiterated above) is the Generality
> of individuals' brains' experiencing of the universal energy-flow.
> such Generality can be relatively-Maximized through individuals' ranging
> widely within their experiential external environments.
> but 'Mind' is what results, 'regardless' of the degree to which
> individuals actually do range widely within their experiential external
> environments.
> 'Minds' that result from ranging widely within individuals' experiential
> external environments 'contain' more information pertaining to the
> universal energy-flow than do 'Minds' that range narrowly within
> experiential external environments, but both 'types' remain the
> one-and-the-same-but-nevertheless-different thing, 'Mind'.
> therein, exists a 'Contradiction', but it's a surmountable one.
> in an absence of understanding of how nervous systems
> process-information, it's this,
> 'one-and-the-same-but-nevertheless-different', stuff that 'precipitates'
> Humanity's Ravaging of itself.
> "NDT's" understanding Fixes and Eliminates such be-cause "NDT's"
> understanding is a 'window' through which a relatively-Generalized
> subset of the universal energy-flow can pass into brains, allowing each
> one-and-the-same-but-nevertheless-different 'Mind' stuff to exist within
> individuals' brains, with the 'one-and-the-same' gaining behavioral
> precedence with respect to the 'but-nevertheless-different'.
> "NDT's" understanding eliminates the Illusory 'Contradiction'.
> there's no 'magic' in-it.
> "NDT's" understanding 'just' allows brains to understand how brains
> 'decide' with respect to 'Ravaging'.
> "NDT's" understanding 'just' does this by 'reducing' brain function to
> TD E/I-minimization, which is stuff that's relatively-Generalized with
> respect to the universal energy-flow.
> that is, TD E/I-minimization is the experientially-independent
> 'one-and-the-same' stuff that enables brains' neural
> information-processing dynamics to Transcend the
> 'but-nevertheless-different' stuff.
> it's TD E/I-minimization that brains 'Love', =not= any particulars
> inherent in this or that TD E/I-minimized neural information-processing
> dynamics.
> TD E/I(min) is that to which Jesus referred when He said (paraphrase),
> "Love God. Love neighbor." by "turning the other cheek, going the extra
> mile, and giving 'em your shirt, too" (which is why i used quotes around
> '"NDT's" [understanding]', above).
> if one "Loves" another, it's inherent in one's behavior that one's
> behavior will actively assist the other's nervous system to achieve TD
> E/I-minimization, 'regardless' of the behavioral particulars involved.
> what does that mean?
> to examine things at-extrema, consider, for instance, any Dictator's
> giving of himself over to the Ravaging of Humanity.
> are folks to "Love" such Dictators because all their brains are doing is
> 'striving' to achieve TD E/I(min)?
> nope, be-cause such Contradicts Humanity-Generalized TD
> E/I-minimization, the Necessity of which derives in the wide-ranging
> 'perception' of the universal energy-flow that was described above.
> so Love Requires folks to 'Reprove' behavior to the degree that the
> behavior Contradicts Humanity-Generalized TD E/I-minimization.
> Failing to do so, in order to allow individuals to experience
> relatively-short-term TD E/I-minimization is the Sham-'love' of
> "expedience", which is actually one-and-the-same with Hate, be-cause
> Sham-'love' actively 'encourages' individuals to 'move away from'
> Generalized TD E/I-minimization... which is what happened to Hitler, and
> the folks who got caught-up in the relatively-short-term TD
> E/I-minimization that accompanied his rise to 'power'. it's what
> happened to Mussolini. it's what happened to Idi Amin. it's what
> happened to the 'Soviet Union' under Stalin. it's what happened to Great
> Britain in the American Revolution. it's what happened to the imposers
> of 'Apartheid' in South Africa. it's what happened to Japan in WWII.
> it's what happened, and what continues to happen, in North Korea.
> it's what will happen in India and Pakistan if each 'nuclear' power
> continues to opt for relatively-localized TD E/I-minimization over
> relatively-Generalized TD E/I-minimization.
> it's what =ALWAYS= happens to folks who disregard Humanity-Generalized
> TD E/I-minimization.
> it's why i Choose to use seemingly-Hard words while addressing folks i
> Love.
> which is why i Acknowledge Jesus' Priority.
> i use the same 'Hard' words that Jesus used be-cause they were (are)
> =Generalized= with respect to TD E/I-minimization =across Humanity=.
> there is a 'Catch', though.
> it is that within nervous systems of individuals who've not ranged
> widely within the universal energy-flow, the thing that's =Generalized=
> with respect to TD E/I-minimization =across Humanity= will tend,
> strongly, to elevate TD E/I over the short-term.
> and such will tend to elicit Ravaging behaviors within nervous systems
> that are not Generalized with respect to TD E/I-minimization across
> Humanity.
> with respect to such, Obligation falls to nervous systems that are
> relatively Generalized with respect to TD E/I-minimization across
> Humanity, be-cause, since nervous systems that are not Generalized with
> respect to TD E/I-minimization across Humanity cannot even 'perceive'
> that which is Generalized with respect to TD E/I-minimization across
> Humanity, if the former don't meet the Obligation in their nervous
> systems' being Generalized with respect to TD E/I-minimization across
> Humanity, TD E/I-minimization that's Generalized across Humanity =will
> not= be achieved, and the same, old, Ravaging 'song' will continue on as
> the 'Anthem' of 'humanity'.
> despite the fact that the Loving Thing often gets one killed, it's still
> the Loving Thing.
> there's 'humor' in-it.
> within the 'perceptions' that can occur within nervous systems that're
> not Generalized with respect to TD E/I-minimization across Humanity,
> Good is treated as 'Bad'.
> so the thing to do is to open the 'door' through which the 'Light' of TD
> E/I-minimization that's Generalized across Humanity can Enter.
> Discernment of Truth with respect to the seemingly-'same' 'fates' of
> Ravagers and Anti-Ravagers, relative to that which each actually does,
> exists in comprehending Humanity-Generalized TD E/I-minimization, and
> doing what needs to be done in order to Facilitate such, despite the
> 'costs'.
> Discernment of Truth is not for the 'faint-hearted'.
> K. P. Collins [Deo Gratias]
> >[...]

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net