The Necessary Cognitive Adjustment
kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Sat Jan 29 10:29:47 EST 2005
This one's technically-demanding.
"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:PpHKd.38033$8u5.20514 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
| news:TboKd.33893$8u5.21561 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "Biological mass" is literally constructed
| within nervous systems as a result of the
| information-processing work that they
| So, "biological mass" cannot just be
| It has physical inertia that can only be
| altered through the doing of =TD E/I-
| minimized= information-processing
Here's a highly-schematic depiction of the
problem I'm discussing:
| \ / |
| \ / |
| \ / | relative "biological mass"
| / \ |
| / \ |
The slopes of the overlaying triangles
vary with the intensity of the TD E/I
variations, but what's crudely depicted
is the relative "biological mass" correl-
ates of 'familiar' stuff and 'unfamiliar'
stuff, as the new stuff is being learned,
and as it "displaces" the "old" stuff.
Without NDT's understanding, the
slopes of the interior sides of the tri-
angles can only be relatively-shallow
[x >> y].
NDT's understanding allows the slopes
to increase significantly, but the point
I've been working to convey is with re-
spect to the relative "biological masses"
and how they vary as behavioral trans-
formations are approached.
Not, in particular, the central point at
which the two internal sides of the ov-
erlapping triangles cross.
This correlates to the "point of random-
ness" that's discussed in AoK, Ap4 --
because, since, at this point, "biological
masses" that correlate to the 'old' and the
'new' stuffs are equal, neither allows TD
E/I-minimization to occur, and the out-
ward appearance is one of behavioral
"stalling" and "indecision".
It's been the case, throughout the course
of Human History, that this "point" has
The functioning of the low-level amygdalar
"supersystem configuration" mechanism
[AoK, Ap5] functions to 'blindly' and auto-
matically force the behavioral "inversion"
[AoK, Ap4] that's inherent, but what's
actually going on is that relative "biological
mass" is just at the critical point of the
desired behavioral transformation.
But, because the underpinning TD E/I
dynamics [discussed in preceding msgs
in this thread] were not comprehended,
the behavioral "stalling" has veitually
always been misinterpreted so that, just
at the =crucial= 'moment' -- when the
behavioral transformation is in its first
"flickering" of becoming actualized, the
folks observing the transformation mis-
interpret the behavioral "stalling" as 'ind-
icating that there is no hope', and, just
when there is the first glimmer of freal
hope, hope is crushed.
The "behavioral stalling" typically in-
cludes folks "flying off the handle" --
throwing "temper tantrums", and other-
wise, acting out the relatively-high TD
E/I that always occurs as individual
nervous systems pass through the
"zone of randomness", which, in our
'times', includes folks blowing them-
selves up, and otherwise slaughter-
The "fault" is always on =both=
sides of the interactive dynamics,
each "side" panicking =just= as
hope is becoming real, which, of
course, 'kills-hope', which amounts
to just more 'blindly'-automated
resistance to "rendering useless"
NDT's understanding constitutes
a Genuine alternative to things'
stereotypical flying-off-the-handle --
be-cause the higher-level "pre-
frontal constellation" overrides
the 'blindly'-automated lower-level
['explosive'] TD E/I-minimization
dynamics, doing so =safely= be-
cause the underpinning neural en-
ergydynamics are comprehended,
which allows all of the stuff that's
correlated to passage through the
"zone of randomness", and which
is where things fly off the handle,
to be recognized for what it is --
ism" stuff that is triggered when
TD E/I becomes relatively-high,
during relatively-short periods of
This enables "Rationality" to govern
behavioral dynamics rather than
'blindly'-automated TD E/I-min-
imization -- which eliminates the
The prerequisite is that NDT's un-
derstanding has to be =generally=
With respect to =that= problem,
see the "diagram", above :-]
The whole discussion applies to the
acquisition of NDT's understanding,
itself. [Ponder this, and you'll under-
stand some other stuff, too :-]
k. p. collins
More information about the Neur-sci