having, this night, reread H. M., i'll contribute as follows...
the only thing that i came across that might be giving folks 'trouble' are
the 1. animal-test paradigm results with H. M. and 2. the temporal pole -
dorsomedial thalamus hypothesis.
in 1., when tests were redesigned in light of results, with animal subjects,
showing 'learning' after removal of the hippocampi, H. M. also showed signs
of having 'learned', although he experienced no feeling of 'familiarity'
with the stuff of the test paradigm.
this's =all= discussed in AoK. NDT describes multiple 'supersystem
configuration mechanisms'. as is discussed in AoK, Ap5, the hippocampus is
just one of these. removal of the hippocampi leave the functioning of the
remaining supersystem configuration mechanisms, although modified, still
functional, and TD E/I-minimization occurs under their control... just as is
explained in AoK.
when H. M. showed signs of having 'learned', it was the TD E/I-minimization
attributable to the remaining supersystem configuration mechanisms that
resulted in the neural activation 'state' convergence underpinning the
by-produced the behaviroal manifestations of 'learning'.
the main contributions to this TD E/I-minimization are from the cerebellum,
which 'just' strips away any extraneous TD E/I that it can, and the
prefrontal cortex mechanism of volition (AoK, Ap7), which is a long-term,
inherently-'quiet', 'plodding' TD E/I-minimization mechanism.
i didn't like the temporal pole hypothesis 20 years ago, and i still don't
because it attributes too-much functionality to dorsomedial thalamus, which
has its hands full with all the work it receives from prefrontal cortex.
H. M.'s flat affect, and the stuff of 'curiosity' ('spontaneous seeking' in
the face of novelty, and his lack of diminution of novelty, and his
inability to finely-tune the internal configuration of his brain, so as to
robustly 'finitize' his neural activation 'state', are, as is discussed in
AoK, Ap5, all due to the absence of the functionality 'normal' hippocampi.
there's much more, but what i'd have to say would be overly-critical of
refs. i'd have to cite. so just take what's above, and read in your own good
refs, separating the wheat from the chaff, with respect to it (which is how
AoK was engineered to be used, anyway... for the same reason... i =hate=
'criticizing folks).
if there's anything in AoK, or anything of the ramifications of NDT, that
anyone wants discussed explicitly (except the stuff of Ap6, which i reserve
for in-person presentations, mostly, because it's just too hard to convey
via 'words'), please ask.
cheers, K. P. Collins (ken)
Eugene Leitl wrote in message <14240.49886.228609.735602 at lrz.de>...
>John writes:
>> > PS: All these posts for refs will soon end, I must return to the world
to
> > make my way and should be buried for the remainder of the year; coming
out
> > to play here and there. Hope the effort has not been in vain and
benefited
> > some. Now if anyone else has some spare time on their hands and would
like
> > to take up the baton circa 3 days time ... .
>>That's a most excellent suggestion. I'm already running a news service
>for ~130 people, perhaps I can bounce occasional neurosci thing or
>two.
>>But it would be of course even better if several other people would
>contribute.
>---
