[TYPOs fixed below (Sorry, everything I'm doing in this Newsgroup is
"extemporaneour'... hence the "typos"... "spelling" (again) is another
matter... while the rules of "spelling" are so-deliberately "arrgant" in the
face of their awesomely-Negative impact upon the energy dynamics of
Communication, I'll continue my long-ongoing Protest against such
=deliberately= perpetuated Waste of that which is =Most-Precious by "just"
"not-caring" about the, so-called, "rules of spelling".. I only "worry"
about mis-spelled Proper Names (which have no Logical "allegience" to any
supposed "rules"). Note that the =Waste= I protest is exactly the Same-Stuff
as the Waste of information-processing capacity that I decried in the
original msg. Why be blind to any such Waste? Folks are 'Addicted' to =Bad=
"spelling". Nobody Cares? ken collins]
kkollins at pop3.concentric.net wrote:
> =Anything= that's 'psychoactive', including many common food substances,
> is 'Addictive'. Such 'Addiction' occurs "simply" be-cause, to the degree
> that the substance does, in fact, alter convergence upon neural
> activation "states", the Learning (development of activity-dependent
> microscopic trophic (growth) modifications) that occurs will be
> relatively-well
correlated
> with the substance-modified neural activation "states".
>> Thereafter, to the degree that the externally-administered substance is
> absent from the neural Chemistry, the substance-dependent micromods
> ("Learning") will be relatively-less able to be converged upon.
Better said: the nervous system's TD E/I-minimization mechanisms will be
relatively-less-able to converge upon activation states established under
the influence of the formerly-externally-applied 'psychoactive' substances.
> In order
> to "offset" this relative-inability to achieve convergence with respect
> to that which was "Learned" while under the influence of the
> externally-administered substance, the neural topology tends to converge
> upon the by-production of behaviors that will cause the host organism to
> "seek" the external sources of the formerly-
[...]
> external[ly]-administered substance upon which internal convergence is
> relatively-dependent.
>> This Verified Stuff has been "glossed-over" with respect to marijuana
> because, customary use of marijuana has been "recreational", and, hence,
> the Learning that has occurred during such "recreational" use is usually
> with respect to relatively-non-enduringly-mattering Trivialities...
> "social"-banter, impromptu sexual interludes, deliberate "vegging-out",
> etc.
>> To see the larger thing =Completely= Verified, and Sorrowfully
> =Documented=, all one has to do is Study the recent Election
> =Initiatives= with respect to marijuana use... there, for all to ponder,
> is the TD E/I-minimization (see all of AoK, and Ap8 in particular)
> -governed by-production of behavioral =Seeking= of the
> formerly-externally-administered 'Addictive' (as above) substance.
>> To the degree of all such stuff, any Society's overall
> information-processing capacity is diminished. That is, to the degree of
> such, what Society =Could= have Been is relatively Abandoned.
>> Everything discussed here stands =Proven=, and has stood =Proven= for
> two Decades. K. P. Collins
>> Charles Frederick Goodin wrote:
>> > I'd always heard that marijuana (or THC) wasn't physiologically
> > addictive. Recently someone mentioned to me that there'd been some
> > research that went against this. Has anyone heard anything?
> >
> > chuk
