Brain clues to attention disorder

Glen M. Sizemore gmsizemore2 at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 19 16:55:48 EST 2003


He's not "goofing" on you, Ken. He's just an idiot - of course, his not
seriously mentally ill like you.


"k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:JmwEb.4606$wL6.3695 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Hi Peter.
>
> Forgive me, please, but I've never been able to discern
> whether or not, in your posts to me, you are 'satyrizing'
> the stuff I discuss. So yor posts persent an ambiguous
> stimulus set to me [which, I understand, BTW, is a
> criticism that can be applied to my own posts by folks
> who've not received either AoK or the decade+-long
> discussion].
>
> So, in case you are goofing on me, I'll explain, a bit,
> what has been my approach - and why I've used a non-
> standard 'nomenclature'.
>
> The nervous system is 'complex'. There's no "snapping
> one's fingers" and comprehending it.
>
> Also, early on in the work I've done, it became clear
> that folks were pretty much oblivious to whole sets of
> necessary things. These necessary things were so far
> out of folks' awarenesses that there weren't even any
> terms with which they could be addressed within any
> standardized nomenclature.
>
> Still, they needed to be not only addressed but func-
> tionally integrated =within the nervous systems= of
> those who were oblivious to them.
>
> Pay attention to the "within the nervous systems" stuff.
> It entails establishing "biological mass" - building and
> accumulating "microscopic trophic modifications" with-
> in nervous systems =other= than my own.
>
> If it seems that I've proceeded to 'gingerly', it's been
> as a consequence of the degree to which I Revere the
> stuff that happens within nervous systems. So, even
> though I've Known all along that I had to work to
> communicate the essence of NDT's stuff to folks, I was
> also aware, all along, that I'd no 'right' to 'impose' the
> production of particular biological mass within, or other-
> wise manipulate other's nervous system function.
>
> It's a =really= hard problem.
>
> I Know that, if I fail, Tragedy will ensue.
>
> But I also Know that elevating TD E/I beyond the
> relatively-small TD E/I(up) that falls within the limits of
> the mechanism of curiosity [AoK, Ap5] assures Failure.
>
> So I just resolved to procede little-by-little, gradually
> building-up the whole 'picture' of NDT's position.
>
> If the "unusual 'technical' terms" I've invoked have been
> a problem, there's nothing that I could do about that.
> Because of the multi-disciplinary integration that occurs
> within NDT, there were just no words that were of any
> use in communicating NDT's stuff.
>
> That, and, remember, I also had to maintain things within
> the range of acceptable TD E/I. [When I started out, I was
> less careful with respect to this, and it quickly became
> apparent to me that it would be very easy for folks to 'fly
> off the handle' with respect to NDT's stuff - to take this
> or that snippet of it and ab-use it. I actually had to shoo
> away folks who approached me as some sort of 'guru'.]
>
> So I've proceeded with caution, in particular, out of re-
> spect for the dynamics of the "zone of randomness" [AoK,
> Ap4], working to lift folks up in the understanding, and
> then working to make sure folks'd not 'over-react' to the
> incompletely-comprehended understanding. If folks look
> back, they'll see that, in my periodic comings and goings,
> etc., I was just implimenting a form of "ratchet-pawling"
> [AoK, Ap5; hippocampus], all the while working to
> assure that TD E/I remained within the Safe range.
>
> It's been Arduous, but some folks have grasped the
> general picture, and, through them, the survival of NDT's
> understanding is assured.
>
> With respect to the non-standard 'nomenclature' I've used,
> it relies in the Neuroanatomy [the neural Topology], and
> AoK is a "key" with respect to such. Anyone who has AoK
> can use it to 'address' any standard neuroanatomical reference,
> and any of the Literature of Neuroscience for that matter.
>
> When I use my non-standard 'nomenclature', what I'm always
> actually doing is using AoK as a 'template' through which to
> address the standard nomenclature [the standard Literature].
> A method such as this was just flat-out necessary because,
> as I pointed out above, NDT's stuff simultaneously 'addresses'
> standard stuff in a way that had no precedent.
>
> For instance, the discussion with respect to the etiology of
> 'adhd' to which you've replied is 'incomprehensible' to any
> who've not studied AoK and the refs cited in AoK, and
> who've not received the discussions of NDT's stuff here in
> b.n, and I posted it, as I post everything these days, for those
> who've done this work. My awareness of the 'difference'
> inherent is what allows me to see my way through the "bio-
> logical mass" considerations that I discussed above. Seeing
> that folks understand allows me to give them higher-'level'
> opportunity to construct further microscopic trophic mod-
> ifications ["biological mass"] within their nervous systems.
>
> The other thing has been that, probably because of my
> early personal experience, I'm 'predisposed' to caution with
> respect to distinguishing between my own work and the work
> of others. I discuss my own work, and trust that folks who
> want to can find the work of others in the published literature.
>
> Some of this last stuff derives in the demands of self-
> preservation - in the face of all the 'rejection' with which my
> efforts to get AoK published have encountered. I had to self-
> sustain, despite the decades-of-stampede to 'move away
> from' NDT's stuff. I cannot convey how exhausting this
> particular circumstance has been. It's fairly sucked the Life
> out of me, =not= because it's personally 'insulting' [even
> though it has been], but be-cause, daily, I've had to
> Witness Savagery unfolding all over the place as the sole
> result of my not yet having brought NDT's stuff to fruition.
> Don't even try to imagine it. You can't. No one else can.
> It's a piercing-aloneness that flails and rips at one's Spirit.
>
> So, in the midst of doing the work and communication, I've
> had to self-sustain - just to be able to continue.
>
> So, all of this is what I've been doing.
>
> I can see that there's a small group of folks who've gotten
> the essence of it, and I write for them - to increase their
> understanding - because, if NDT's stuff is to come forward,
> it will be because of what these folks have to say with respect
> to it.
>
> You know?
>
> It's all been an extremely-serious matter.
>
> I've Honored that.
>
> [And, BTW, I came back online to do some more
> 'Difficult' stuff that needs doing. I'll be getting into it as I
> sense folks'  'comfort levels' are within the necessary
> bounds.]
>
> This said, my 'heart' leaped upon the experiencing of the
> tender mercies you expressed toward Infants who've
> sufferred "touch deprivation".
>
> Cheers, Peter,
>
> ken [k. p. collins]
>
> "Peter F." <fell_spamtrap_in-hopefullyeffectiveagainstspam at ozemail.com.au>
> wrote in message news:%WtEb.70$g21.2525 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > "kenneth p Collins" <kpaulc at earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:3IWDb.1560$wL6.817 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > The "hyperactivity element" is an =artifact= of the
> > > elevated TD E/I that is imposed externally, and
> > > which prevents the development of long-term
> > > active-phase experience, which weakens, or
> > > flat-out prevents, the 'normal' passiv[e]->active
> > > dominance behavioral transition, the absence of
> > > which is all that 'adhd' is.
> > >
> > > The "hyperactivity element" is 'just' what happens
> > > in the absence of robust active-phase [motor-
> > > dominant] experience and correlated development -
> > > in the absence of inwardly-generated directionality,
> > > behavior 'floats' upon the 'sea' of sensory experience.
> > > [Modern electronic-gadget stuff, including TV, that
> > > imposes behavioral passivity [sensory-dominance]
> > > augments these dynamics.
> >
> > It is deeply and awfully ironic that the minds of normal
> > neuroscientist are part of this naturally evolved 'conspiracy'
> > (i.e., our *almost flawlessly* AEVASIVEly evolved and
> > operating brains;) NOT to deeply understand [or at
> > least NOT sufficiently clearly and completely ENOUGH
> > to inspire wide-spread implementation of in principle
> > cheap and simple social and self-regulatory remedies)
> > what is going on.
> >
> > You are always pointing this irony out, but in a usually
> > *non*-ironic way, using unusual 'technical' terms.
> >
> > Other people, who understanding the same scenario but
> > in somewhat different ways to you, say something along
> > these lines:
> >
> > Certain chronically and/or traumatically deprived needs,
> > here especially "touch deprivation" and being held and
> > naturally rocked (while carried around) in early infancy,
> > also deprives the deprived individual's brain of local
> > brain-growth-promoting stimulation; and thereby also
> > causing a hypotrophic condition that is naturally sought
> > to be compensated for in some NOT necessarily
> > successful way -- e.g., by a 'socially disturbing' ADHD
> > type brain functural compromise [just to stay on-topic
> > in this thread].
> >
> > Some of the simplifying concEPTual and explanatory
> > tricks that I use to understanding mainly myself and
> > people in general, include talking and thinking about
> > ourselves in terms of:
> >
> > The somewhat tenuously tailored acronym-term
> > "AEVASIVE". It approximatley stands for: "Ambi-
> > advantageously Evolved Vital (or Vested, or any other
> > desperately invoked V-word) Actention (Selection)
> > System, Incorporating (amongst many other key brain-
> > functural elements) Various Endoopiates (use
> > "endoopiates" both because of the acronym-building
> > alphabetic character it provides, and because endogenous
> > opiate-like neuromodulators exist in a central
> > 'psychophysiological position' and play a known role that
> > is quite instructive in a certain respect - one that this
> > acronym is partly meant to refer to);
> >
> > CURSES [short, and appropriately nasty, for: "conditioned-
> > in unconscious remembrances/reverberations of (SHITS-
> > type) stressors, effecting symptoms] -- refers to a type of
> > conditioned in states (most centrally a type of memories);
> >
> > And, for what CURSES are being caused by, I use
> > "selective Hibernation" imploring type (life-)situation(s)" --
> > or "SHITS" for something sneeringly short and
> > appropriately unpleasant sounding.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter
>
>
>





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list