[Neuroscience] Answer to M. Kirkcaldie (was Re: Powerful complement
to your treatment method)
fell_spambotswamp_in at ozemaildorcomdotau
Sun Nov 13 23:17:13 EST 2005
"Matthew Kirkcaldie" <m.kirkcaldie at removethis.unsw.edu.au> wrote in
news:m.kirkcaldie-657481.19490307112005 at un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipene
> In article
> <436df4da$0$31015$5a62ac22 at per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
> "Peter F" <fell_spambotswamp_in at ozemaildorcomdotau> wrote:
> > (And, to mention just one specific factual reason: the fibers
> > from the amagdala to the frontal cortices are distinctly more
> > than the
> > fibers projecting back to the amygdala.)
> I'm dropping a rock in a well,
> but exactly what do you mean by this?
You are a good bullshit (and non-science) detector!
What I wrote was a too loud association to a by me read article that
appeared to have been written by a brain scientist .
I should have left that flimsy info [that I recently (some weeks or
months ago) picked up on some Swedish? brain science website (I think it
was)] out of the discussion.
It was a paranthesized side-reflection of what I had written just
"I don't feel good about being a bit of a bastard to decent enough
That I know why and how I sometimes get "driven" to be
one does not make it possible for me to always avoid being one."
My less-than-scientifically-rigorous hunch (which I recklessly rashly
responded to) was that
when some neurons of brain regions known to be of
crucial importance in generating negative emotion (such as the amygdala)
have been strongly stimulated by some instinctively threatening
environmental influence [or have in the past been conditioned to be
strung and/or to forthwith "easily fly off the handle" at the slightest
(phobic) provocation] the psychobehavioral effect tends to be
unstoppable -- i.e. unstoppable by neurons (of the frontal lobes and
temporal lobes) that
are known to be required for us (some of us) to have developed and to
scientific and well-socialized (rationally and smoothely AEVASIVE)
> There's no such thing as "the amygdala", it's a collection of many
> nuclei. Which bits do you mean? What are the "frontal cortices"?
> How were the fibres counted - one, two, three, ... six hundred
Are you deliberately trying to trip me up by creating a log-jam (or
avalange of trees) for me, or are you turning into a
caricature of a reductionist right in fron to my eyes. ;-)
> And, most importantly, what is the source of the information?
If I can retrieve the specific source of my paranthesized throw-in, I
shall post a message especially to let you know.
Meanwhile you might like to evaluate the contents of this web site
> You're having the cake and eating it too - loftily claiming the right
> to generalise in the woolliest, least helpful way
> about brain function,
I agree that geneticists, biochemists, neurophysiologist in combination
with people with relevant engineering skills, and even neurosurgeons or
authors of placebo-effective and/or hope instilling ideas/views, can be
more readily helpful than my effectively philosophy terminating (EPT)
You have given my amygdala-related aside (or off the cuff comment) a
rightful sudsy soaking, but "my EPT baby" will remain bouyant I as long
as there is no logical and scientific reasons to pull the plug and let
it drain away.
> adding nothing to others' understanding,
It really looks like I have been trying in vain
to inspire, in others, insights with as similar depth and bredth
and SEPTIC (~science-aligned) quality to what exist in my mind.
So, you might be right.
However, you might be right for a - *to you not yet known* - reason.
> but satisfying your ego
You are right in so far as that my CURSES-handling AEVASIVE invention
of some to me insight congealing concEPTs has had an "ego satisfying (or
> showing how everything they don't understand is magically part of your
> treasured acronyms. Acronyms which, when explicated, dissolve into
> rococo, self-referential jargon conveying nothing. And then to claim
> some kind of credibility you toss in a pseudo-fact, couched in terms
> loose as to be meaningless - after characterising scientists as
> uninterested in the "forest" because they're seeking ever more
> "trees" ... like quantifying the numbers of projecting fibres between
> regions of the brain, perhaps.
Hope you have enjoyed winning this tiny little battle in the war. ;->
But don't you at least have a little bit of liking for the way I refer
to what is most *instrumentally* causing people's thoughts, emotions and
IOW, don't you get any joy and satisfaction out of thinking that your
defense of scientific rigour was produced by your ASS? :-|
The ASS is short for "Actention Selection System".
(BTW, it is also EPTly abbreviated to AS.)
> So which is it, Peter? Is science self-delusion, or worthwhile?
Science is an example of an effect of our "ambiadvantageously
I meant that seriously! That is not an iota of idiocy intended!
> Or was
> it only useful to the point where it explained just enough for you to
> coin your magic acronyms, whereupon you'll take on the load of the
> for **absolute truth** [highlighted by PF], and we'll just take your
word for it from here on
Sorry to have made you so frustrated that even you started to sound
As far as "absolute truth" -- I would prefer that you did not put true
rubbish in my mouth.
I'd have rather seen finding *any* reason to laugh at my
decEPTively phoney concEPTualizations than having to experience this
turDgid throwing of such cheap shit (as "absolute truth") at me. ;-)
> Here's a challenge - should you choose to answer these questions, see
> you can do it without resorting to acronyms and jargon, using words
> found in the dictionary, in their commonly accepted senses instead of
> some "special" meaning you've coined.
As always I shall try!
I'll explain what I have given a
rationally incontrovertible definition,
and is referring to with "AEVASIVE"
(or with "AEVASIVEness", or "AEVASIVEly").
But let me warn you that AEVASIVE is not an easy grasping-tool to use.
This because, what it allows a grasp of is not something that can be
summed up and grasped by help of existing conventional concepts.
To me, AEVASIVE exemplifies an
optimal compromise between acronymic allusiveness and explanatory
conceptual compactness (on one hand), and (on the other hand) "balance"
(neutralization of prejudices and biases) and an as explicit as
realistically possible explanatory bredth and depth.
The "Actention Selection System" can be held to include hands to
manipulate things with, legs to stalk with,
and a tongue (lips, etcetera) to talk with, and so forth.
However, the main focus of how I suggest the ASS
is used to think feel and do things with, is on neurons.
Many known specializations of function are approximately known to exist
within the ASS. In fact I see these indications to be many in enough for
cautiously imagine the ASS to be an only vaguely modular (largely far
from neatly ordered)
system of "program structures".
I.e., structures with functions (or functures); some of which that
relative to some other "actention modules" are incompatible and have a
(reciprocal inhibitory) effect on each other.
Given an environment adequately conducive to embryogenesis,
1. we tend to be born with an ASS rearing to go and be preoccupied with
(or to "pay" vital energy
toward) instinctive (not learnt) mental and motor activities
2. we realize our potential to acquire additional actention modules
far into adulthood and old age.
What this last aspect of the ASS is, is usually generally referred to as
"capacity to learn". :-)
Against a background of every relevant scientific (from scientifically
"best bet" to securely established) principle theory interpretation or
conclusion (not the least to do with how brains work), with this simple
concEPT as a base, it is possible and can be unusually satisfying to
imagine the ongoing functioning of the ASS as a partly
parallel competiton for transient dominance between at any one time
usually unequally weighted "actention modules"; Furthermore, it is to be
imagined that this "competition" is "cheered and booed" by an "audience"
that consists of influential environmental features -
both present and past. In this case "past features" refers to every kind
of stored aftereffect of influences within
an individuals lifetime, plus epigenetic and of course genetic echoes of
the patterns of environmental features that affected antecendant
generations (and populations) of individuals).
This, plus different other philosophically relevant and complementary
for e.g. "Scientifically Established Principles Theories etc....;->) is
implied by "AEVASIVE" and the other conceptual ingredients of what I
Before I get to the very dry core of EPT, please allow me to prepare you
just a little bit more - with words that are ordinary enough so that
you have a chance (not necessarily a "lucky chance") to
understand it [but not to happily understand it *unless* you can quickly
acquire some protective puerile (including 'toilet') humor].
Without going into details on how and why I arrived at a perverse mix of
enlightenment and mirth, *that is exactly what I did*.
I confidently believe that it is an unprecedented mix;
One made possible by a fresh terminology developed along science-aligned
tracks, but also through plenty of error plagued
The mix, the terminology, and the kind of thinking implicitly required
to appreciate it all, deserve to be dubbed, and instructively
warning-flagged with a string of capitals that looks exactly like
"EPT", that almost sounds like and insinuates the value judgement "apt",
and that dissuades from mental associations to any kind or sign of
And, rather than making you think that I am seeing EPT as an
poignant thesis without even the possibility of an antithesis, or an
almost entirely philosophy terminating such, it might help _me_ more (to
fertilize _your_ mind (with the memes of mine)) if I suggest that you
try to approach EPT as if it was an 'elevated philosophical
trampoline' - one that might be fun to use.
How about it? ;-)
(BTW, I have never claimed that EPT is "science terminating".)
Anyway, my 'EPT approach' has allowed me a defiant overview and insight
into what our phylogeny has made us normally (and relatively) unable to
"come to terms with" (both literally and figuratively, that is).
In passing, let's presume we both understand biological evolution and
human nature (and nervous/endocrine system) in roughly or basically the
same factual (or snuggly science-aligned ;) way.
And, for all I care, let's agree that you know these
things in a more explicitly factually aware way, than I.
However, I hope you are able to accept that I
have supplemented my view of **"What Is going on"** (explained below) by
sem_antics (semantic antics). ;-)
Some of these (sem_antics) are, to me, simultaneously insight cementing
and preventing of off-putting emotions - of the kinds that tend to be
triggered by the topic at hand.
I was specifically referring to that I have done much mulling to do with
the evolutionary (and psychological and behavioral) meaning
of the fact that nature often irredeemably frustrates or otherwise
intolerably denies *instinctual* (i.e. evolved and ontogenetically
expressed but not learnt) needs.
It is a very unfunny topic. (Am sure you can agree that it is.)
As a result, I even contrived one or two concepts that are of so
little worth (or perhaps even as commensurately detrimental) as
anti-acid tablets against peptic reflux.]
What I refer to by the positively ultimate umbrella expression
"What Is going on" includes the potential, and more or less obvious ways
realized, spacetime patterning of energy-matter.
One broad aspect of this is a patterning in a sequential fashion that
was at first fundamentally physical
(most intricately addressed by string/M theoretical considerations),
then astrophysical, then prebiotic, then phylogenetic, then cultural,
and perhaps in the future 'cyborgenic'.
At least it seems to me that we are currently on the cusp, or in a phase
transition, to a cyborg evolving era.
However, no matter what evolutionary era one is talking about, it is
reasonable to describe it as completely involving, or consisting of, the
"Evolutionary patterning (or potential, or Pressure) Totality".
I have looked for, percEPTively spotted, and concEPTually captured
some by Science (including philosophy) least accounted for aspects
of the phylogeny of fauna most relevant to us.
That is, most especially from such accounts "most missing" patterns of
patterning that if known and understood throw "evolutionary
light on the minds and behaviors of folk.
My concEPTs help me to focus (a partly fuzzsilly logical) attention
onto crucially important EPT subcategories
(or instructive semantic "septs" - or a septal system of evolutionary
psychobiology type evolution pertaining thinking).
[Here starts my main and almost philosophy-finishing point. %-]
These subcategories are:
1. The [in any percEPTive view of any evolving Universe] obviously to be
classified into a postion of ultimate primacy and predominance,
primarily or predominatly "opportunity type" (constructive and on the
whole complexifying, or positively naturally selective) potential or
actual patterning of - or evolutionary "pressure" toward - "some thing"
rather than "no thing".
Less fundamentally physically considered, this most primary EPT
category - i.e.
"opportunity type evolutionary pressures" (OTEP) - can be something as
concrete as an in relation to a specific evolving or speciating
population not yet exploited but near at hand, or most readily mutated
toward being taken adaptive advantage of, environmental (ecological to
2. The primarily or predominantly adverse or destructively patterning
(negatively naturally selective, or naturally pruning) lifetime
situations/stressors/stimulation. It might be efficiently described as
Adversity Type Selective Pressures (or ATSP for short).
These two (1. and 2.) utter generalizations are, as a matter of
principle, to be
understood from the perspective of each individual that has ever been
and that shall ever to be alive; and, as lifetime challenges that have
been (and still are and will be) most especially relevant to, and that
have with obviously significant frequency occurred, in the phylogeny of
It might not look like it to you yet, but my complementary 'evolution
pertaining thinking' is *a strategy for achieving an
irrationality-relieving philanthropically oriented outlook on
Even closer to (actually right at the heart of) the core of EPT is the
following consideration of 'evolutionary psychobiology type':
In nature (not excluding within human and prehuman societies), many
kinds of traumatic stimulation or ditto distressors (as different from
eustressors), or painfully frustrating situations, frequently occur in
overlap with any relevant OTEP (merely "opportunity type evolutionary
Traumas are EPTly understood from a phylogenetic perspective as
physically unavoidable stressful stimulation/situations that if they are
to be survived and adaptively handled "implore" that the individual is
capable of "specific hibernation".
That is, Nature does, in such situations, as if "implore" the individual
to hibernate in a highly *specific* manner - NOT in a general manner;
In a "specific hibernation imploring type situation", nature (or
Darwin's simple principle of natural selection) does not as if "implore"
that an individual's behavior be blocked generally. Instead, it
"implores" that a
SHITS-specific self-defeating behavior (or motor and/or mental
"actention") be blocked with high selectivity (specificity or
Nor does nature implore that the same individual's "consciousness"
canceled totally, only selectively;
Lastly, nature does not implore a general muting of individual's
metabolism, but that it is muted very precisely by way of synaptic LTD
(Long Term Depression) - an adaptive adjustment not exclusively but very
much typically made possible
by help of endogenous opiate-like peptides and their (on post-synaptic
surfaces situated) receptors.
"General hibernation" is of course how "hibernation" (and, for this
metabolism muting matter, aestivation) is most conventionally meant.
I know you don't yet - or perhaps never will - know (or accEPT) what I
mean by "consciousness".
Even so, you should be able to guess that I and almost any other
reasonably science-aligned thinker can safely if loosely say that it is
'a phylogenetically emerged brainspacetime 'phenomenon' which most
essentially, "instrumentally", and centrally, depends on a sufficient
metabolic turnover by neurons.
By "specific hibernation" I refer to a self-inhibitory self-regulatory
function that with synaptic precision preempts ("gates", blocks, filters
out) excitatory neuronal signals before they energize (or keep on
energizing) a self-defeating preoccupation (or actention).
"Specific hibernation" allows individuals to continue to be "actentive"
(preoccupied) in ways that might be adaptive in face of concurrent
threats that require flight or fight or immuno-reactive type
responses - NOT "specific hibernation") AND concurrent environmental
of "opportunity type" (OTEP).
Now, could be a suitable time to TRY to outline the core of EPT!
Amongst all possible heritable genetic changes that have been
field-tested by multi-cellular or neural individuals being challenged
and "naturally selected (or naturally pruned) from" by lifetime
situations (life-situations) that
consisted of (or that can be characterized as) a coincidence or
combination of at least one SHITS
[=Specific Hibernation Imploring Type Stressor/s - importantly including
tardily and relatively trivially traumatic situations/stimulation; i.e.,
not just dramatically traumatizing predicaments and/or traumatic events
occurring at or near a 'top tempo']
AND one or more "OTEP"
[=Opportunity Type Evolutionary Pressures - that given the law of large
numbers have frequently enough correlated with a successful striving to
exploit a niche-space or finding a mating partner in direct competition
with other "candidates", e.g. same-sex siblings],
those mutations that (on the whole) were most likely to be part of an
individual's (resulting phenotype's) successful (or
lineage-lengthening) 'candidature for ancestorhood' were those
(heritable genetic changes) whose "phenotyping" contribution were (the
only or the most) "AMBI-ADVANTAGEOUS" (or "ambiadvantageously
Moreover, it normally follows that "specific hibernation
imploring (and - if to be survived - also inducing) type stressors or
ditto stimulation (a 'SHI-type' _subcategory_ of adverse lifetime
challenges) become as if "stamped in" (or become "memory states"- NOT
necessarily states of conscious remembering)
by whatever relevant cytochemical means available.
Or, as I prefer to put it in want more suitable acronym-building
Normally, the residue of a SHITS is stored in the ASS of
unfortunately thus ended-up individual.
Whatever the exact means and chemical interactions that creates the as
"SHITS storing state", such states of stored SHITS can be characterized
as "Conditioned-in" [and
"chronically kept hibernated", hence] Unconsiously Remembered Stressors,
This characterization lends itself to a pronounciation of an acronym of
only the shortest spelling-version is CURSES.
CURSES (or ~CCKHHURSES~) can be considered to be both
(on one hand) an insidious and potentially disintegrative
endogenously motivational "neuropsychophysiological" pressure, and (on
other hand) a primarily pruning (or primarily negatively naturally
That is, CURSES are to be considered "endogenously motivational"
because they motivate (or co-motivate) not just symptoms as obvious
as those most commonly associated with the notion of Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD), but a vast variety of more or less
(often but not always recognizable as exaggerated or amplified, or
more or less obviously suppressed, emotions, behaviors, or thoughts).
The "symptoms" acronymically referred to by CURSES also include
somatically manifest diseases (not just those conventionally
as psychosomatic in origin).
CURSES are insidious neurological states that have played a significant
(naturally selective) role in our phylogeny by extending and refining
the effect of environmental selective pressures, and that is also an
important factor of influence on (or behind) the development and
persistence of neurotic (or, expressed with less inbuilt derogation,
AEVASIVE) personalities and cultures.
Hence, CURSES belongs to the same side of 'the EPT equation' as SHITS
AEVASIVE is alone on the other side of this (Evolutionary Psychobiology
Type) 'equation' (or 'flowchart' of EPTly explained causes and effects).
:~ OTSP + (SHITS=>CURSES) => AEVASIVE
AEVASIVE is approximately derived from:
(a pragmatic rephrasing of "situations that have best been coped with
reproductively survived by having an "ambiadvantageously" adaptive
Veritable (or Vital, or Vexed, or any other with pragmatism accEPTable
Actention Selection (and/or System)
'Endoopiates' (Endorphins/ Enkephalins)
AEVASIVE is a necessarily an only loosely lingual representation of how
an individual's ASS
(especially that of a human individual) handles not only the SHITS that
currently be in, but also how it handles the accumulation of CURSES that
individual's neurochemophysiology (given it is normal) automatically
allowed to be conditioned-in by SHITS s/he is NO LONGER IN.
Lastly, to end up on a light-hearted note, my etymologically pioneering
terminology become even by
piquant if combined with Arthur Janov's jargon. Just consider this
"We not only sometimes behave in ways that produce Pain in the ASS of
others, but we often
do so because Pain in the ASS is precisely part of why we tend to behave
that way in the first place."
More information about the Neur-sci