Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Brain dynamics, category formation, consciousness and the asymmetric

Expand Messages
  • chris lofting
    The IDM perspective (http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/introIDM.html) in regard to meaning derivation covers the dynamics of self-referencing
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 1, 2008
      The IDM perspective
      (http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/introIDM.html) in regard to
      meaning derivation covers the dynamics of self-referencing creating
      categories of meaning. The generality of these categories (and so 'language
      of the vague') maximises the accuracy of classifications. On the other hand,
      the self-referencing, given depth, contributes by increasing specialist
      perspectives such that the specific categories increase the possibility of,
      the precision in, prediction. We see this at work in the lateralisation of
      the brain with a probabilities-focused, high precision, inductive-abductive,
      crisp, differentiating 'side' working with a general, hypothesis-bearing,
      deductive, vague, integrating 'side'. (the 'side' emphasis hides a more
      detailed perspective of the one dimension of meanings applicable to all
      levels of the brain, from hemispheres to pairs of neurons, from spine to pfc

      An essential feature of categories is their hierarchy and so ASYMMETRIC form
      - the focus on "IS-A" links categories across superordinate/subordinate
      levels. What is implied by this is the requirement for the IMP operator of
      logic (Implies and so the CONDITIONAL, IF...THEN...). This operator is
      associated with the dynamics of MEDIATION where such demands a SERIAL and so
      SEQUENCING focus.

      In the analysis of the brain overall we find an asymmetry in brain structure
      where a vague bias to one hemisphere differentiating and the other
      integrating brings out an anti-symmetry/symmetry relation at work across all
      neuron-dependent life forms. When NEW or COMPLEX information is experienced
      we find the brain will oscillate across the hemispheres to process the
      information. This introduction of a SERIAL dynamic introduces us to the
      realm of the IMP (implies) logic operator and so to mediation dynamics. When
      we come across simple or KNOWN information we do not see these extreme
      oscillations at work.

      Other work (Matte-Blanco etc) in the context of interpretations of reality
      introduce us to the differences of symmetric/anti-symmetric thinking versus
      asymmetric thinking - the essential difference being in precision in logic
      where the symmetric thinking style LACKS precision in its inability to deal
      with the conditional; all meaning can not be 'logically' reduced past the
      BI-conditional (IF and ONLY IF). Thus bi-logic appears as 'irrational' when
      seen from an asymmetric, formal logic, position, where the fact is more that
      there is a lack in precision; it is still 'logic' but not covering the
      asymmetric essentials for full logic interpretations.

      The symmetric thinking dynamic is one that best-fits a social species where
      sameness is preferred over difference (stereotyping being a common property)
      and emotional communication is through spectrum exchange and so a symmetric

      Emotional intensity allows for amplification or damping of responses and so
      limited dynamics focused upon an immediate, or very close to, response to a
      stimulus. Thus there is a holistic, organic, dynamic present in these forms
      of communication with variations in intensity (and so magnitudes) making
      limited, vague, distinctions of context. Thus PARTS analysis is made up of
      discretisation and amplification of some part to then be treated AS IF a
      whole - more so there is no formal categorisation level that differentiates
      part from whole, they are considered interchangeable, symmetric, and so
      bring out issues of metonymy/metaphor dynamics we experience with paradox
      (http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/paradox.html )

      It is with the development of SEQUENCING and so the SERIAL that magnitudinal
      communication is refined through vectoring and so the ASYMMETRIC operator
      that allows for categories to be created and used and emotional exchanges to
      be given direction, force, intent, beyond their immediacy - this leads into
      the formation of rigid hierarchies formed around pyramid or tree-like
      structures and so a focus on SYNTAX. The development of the brain shows us
      the emergence of sequencing, ordinality, well well after the emergence of
      magnitudinal communications, cardinality (as raw emotions). With this
      emergence of sequencing (tied to hippocampus development), so an intense
      emotional, immediate, expression can be drawn-out, damped, to be more
      precise but also more subtle in expression.

      The movement into the serial is a movement into refining communication
      through mediation and the use of symbol formation. This moves us into the
      realm of the asymmetric and with that the emergence of consciousness and
      languages - the latter stemming from the fact that self-referencing will,
      given depth, allow a system to describe itself with reference to itself,
      i.e. become autological (and potentially paradoxical) - and one thing
      consciousness can do is exactly that - describe itself.

      With exposure to a demanding, serialising, context, our brains will develop
      a left hemisphere bias in overall control of soma and psyche. This
      development reflects self-referencing through distinction-making (and so the
      differentiating). Out of this comes precision and the autological trait that
      serves to extend our natures beyond that of 'smart apes'. (primitive
      tribes/children will be more integrated with their environment due to lack
      in precision in expression and so being dependent on local context to
      express themselves - all meaning is through analogy often converted to a
      literal tie of self with context - as we find in the basic sense of
      territory and its protection AS IF 'us')

      In symmetric thinking the hierarchy necessary for syntactic dynamics is not
      present (or severely limited); at best we have a nested form of hierarchy
      covering web and network-like structures that allow for symmetry and so
      equivalences; relationships can span logical levels etc. This realm covers
      that of metaphors and their interchangability in interpreting reality, as
      such it covers closed-system dynamics (conservation laws etc) and a
      dumbing-down of precision for the sake of ease in social communications -
      all of these being properties of post-modernism mindsets.

      Implicit in all of this, and covering the 'forward' development of the brain
      as well as left/right issues, is that mediation dynamics to a level of
      language development through analogy-usage (where basic analogy patterns are
      hard-coded into our brains as a consequence of in-depth self-referencing) is
      a LATER development, emerging from the mindless levels of basic part/whole
      dynamics (or more so 'local/non-local' dynamics, consideration of harmonics
      of the whole etc) where those systems that oscillated across the
      anti-symmetry/symmetry, aka differentiating/integrating, dichotomy moved
      into problem solving through supply of CHOICES in responses to stimuli -
      these being in the form of categories derived from the self-referencing when
      we deal with the new/complex.

      We cannot have 'full blown consciousness' WITHOUT the mediation dynamics of
      our brains within a support context of massive numbers and massive
      connections of neurons. The IMMEDIACY of the anti-symmetry/symmetry realm
      PROHIBITS the presence of consciousness at the 'immediate', mindless,
      stimulus/response levels - this being due to the interference of mediation
      in the expression of a response to a stimulus. As such, the realm of
      mediation is never 'complete', it is 'eternal' in that mediation is grounded
      in uncertainty and has no explicit 'finish'; as do all languages that are
      also uncertain - certainty is 'beyond question' and as such takes on the
      form of an instinct/habit/memory, elicited by the push of context where such
      allows for recall and refinement/replacement of at least a habit/memory.

      A property of SYMMETRY is a sense of 'perfection' and the aggregation of
      material from exposure to differences allows for the refinement of
      instincts/habits through the focus on 'sameness'. Ultimately, the
      establishment of 'perfection' is in direct, immediate, precise, efficient,
      'true', response to context and so without 'thought', without mediation. IOW
      the development of instincts/habits is a form of death for consciousness
      (brought out in the fact that we habituate to sameness and so lose awareness
      of such, we are over-sensitive to differences) and so the realm of mediation
      is only, in principle, temporary.

      THAT said, the ability to generate languages and to use imagination turns us
      inwards in the development of our mediation skills for the sake of our own
      survival as a mediating species; if there are no differences, no uniqueness,
      we make them. To fall back on our instincts/habits realm is to fall back on
      our primate natures as 'smart apes' and that leads nowhere other than back
      to the forest. Thus the path of transcendence, even if only imagined, is the
      path of developing consciousness and so delving into the realm of languages
      where it is language that allows for transcendence. Basic mediations focused
      on instinct/habits only let us transform, to 'fit in' to some existing
      context as compared to asserting our own.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.