No subject


Sun Apr 10 21:10:45 EST 2005


(1) The cultural prefigurations preventing studying 
-and cash flowing- in the neurobiological field of the
production of subjective characterizations by the
brain parenchyma. We here devoted a lot of time to
these History of Ideas studies. It so became progressi-
vely depicted the syncretic myth blocking of such studies,
specially in those well-organized countries that conse-
quently rely the most on the organizing prefigurations
of their peoples. In this connexion, the role of the
cults is complex, since there exists a real social need of 
consolation (with which those of us, working in mental
health, are exceedingly well acquainted). Even if religions were
the Opium des Volkes we cannot dismiss opiates! But contrarily
the role of the cult bussiness is culturally simple and straight-
forward: neither money nor academic recognition towards
physico-experimental research on the differential produc-
tion of one-witness, non-structural phenomena.  This 
has nothing to do with religion, but only with the cults, 
and in particular with the cult bussiness; but it is
grounded in a factual mistake. They don't need maintaining
the dualist cut just between a corruptible brain, and a
transcendental soul that includes those non-structural
contents; these last can perfectly be left to natural
sciences while grounding any transcendentality in the
cadacualtez, or Jemeinigkeit.  What prevents this last move
is, only, the supposition that there is no science but that
of the general realities; of individuals, no knowledge is
acknowledged.  This cultural intrincacy is on its way of
being overcome, and so I imagine that the neurosciences
in the next years shall habitually allow funding to said
experimental investigations, even in those central and
well organized countries where, also, industry needs
non-Turing automata the most.


(2) Also the prefigurations of the Pythagoric-Parmeni-
dean tradition that produced some false expectancies
of experimental and factual findings, i.e., engrams,
scotophobina, anlagen of marsupial pouches (while
placentarians were supposed to have a marsupial descent)
or "great-great-grandmother neurons".  These are connec-
ted with the conceptual categories of a virtual reality
(mind) arising from a real reality (brain) in the Pla-
tonic chain from the "ouk ontos ouk oon" towards the "pan-
teloos oon".  But the essential development of these
Western conceptual tools occurred in connexion with the
Roman Church sacrament of Eucharist (that, independent
of its transcendental effect, was culturally interpreted
through those conceptual tools).  It was for these rea-
sons that in former postings I mentioned that these
studies in the History of Ideas, if requisite for our
experimental work in neurosciences, are highly complex,
demand full seriousness and admit no dilettantes.

(3) Finally, regarding the cults there is definite 
psychopathological evidence that they, just as several
other kinds of institutional commonalities, select some
kinds of adequate personalities.  The peculiarities of
these, of course, have no need of being grounded only on
neurobiological features, and can admit concurrent indi-
vidual and social complementary series of etiological
triggerings.  But what Grant inquiries, is not about the
cults, in this connexion, but about religion. Such a
"religatio", from a neuroscientific standpoint, on Earth
became factibilized by the Mesozoic reptilian selection
of prolacteal glands and perhaps play, and of lactation,
dreaming and play in Mesozoic marsupial and placentarian
Orders. This allowed formation of primary diads (mother-son) 
strongly linked by affective attachments (whose neurobio-
logical opportune production was selected) required to
value transcendence (after hominization). After such neuro-
biological factibilization, the religious links with the
transcendence present themselves accompanied with feelings
that intrinsically are foreign to the eventual objective 
truth of such religatio, but upon which feelings are incident
said objective need of consolation, in such a way as to permit
the institutional operation of the cult bussiness. Neverthe-
less I do not find that, in itself, the mentioned "religatio",
apart of the selection of personalities done by the cult
bussiness and apart of the feelings evolved with the pecu-
liar phylogeny of our brain, has any requirement of special
neurobiological anomalies to produce it. As a biochemist
I cannot imagine any substratal requirement of such anomaly
since it is a matter of linking object contents; however,
I cannot discard a kind of incalescency towards repeating
the aforementioned primary-diad feelings in connexion with
the transcendental mysteries, viz. an education of the sen-
suality towards these object contents.

In matters so complex as these, what I find essential
is being extremely careful with the conceptual and
terminological tools we use, as also required in every
transdisciplinary venture that attemps to be fecund
and not merely yuxtapositionative.  Anyway, ganglia or
neural networks cannot neither engage as clients for the
services of the cult bussiness, nor wonder why there is
something and not instead nothing and, thus, "religating"
themselves with the unknown ground of such peculiarity.
Only brains producing psychisms can do it.

A similar example I posted two days ago, regarding the Chine-
se transplant of brain cells. I remarked there that such im-
plant does not transfer neither psychism nor the cadacualtez.
(However, I did not receive from this List the return of my
mail; could I pray for someone saying me if it was indeed
received?).

But I must now return to my Weigerts!

            More cyberkisses for everyone, from

                             Mariela

       =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
       Prof. Mariela Szirko,
       <postmaster at neubio.sld.ar> 
                            
       Centro de Investig. Neurobiologicas, Ministry
       of Health & Welfare, Argentine Republic; and Lab. of
       Electroneurobiological Res., Hospital "Dr. Jose Tiburcio Borda", 
       Municipality of Buenos Aires,
       Office:  Phone/Fax (54 1) 306 -7314
                e-mail <postmaster at neubio.gov.ar>
       Standard disclaimer: Las opiniones de este mensaje son personales 
      y no comprometen las dependencias a cargo de la firmante.
  Reply to THIS message,  ONLY to: <postmaster at neubio.sld.ar> 
  =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list