IUBio

New Intelligence

Cijadrachon cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Wed May 12 13:54:44 EST 1999


(Long Bla)


Hi Dag.

>severe backlog of binet.neuroscience stuff. Will prehaps read and
>comment when I get to it.

That one was ages ago, not sure, but believe someone had asked about
the physical equivalents of "the mind" and after some babbling in the
start that should have zarked away most I was not interested in
reading it, there were a few lines somewhere in there with my opinion
about that. However, if I recall right, this was after Frank LeFever
seemed to mistake the courtesy to this room to try to express 
part of my opinions in English and neuro irxtlwrrkses
with me wanting to impress him, and him also running some snide
remarks on my error rate after the concussion at times where I did not
watch it that much. Since I always liked most of my terms better than
neuros anyway and find it hard to avoid using neuro terms without
errors being forced over what I want to express (like the playground
is not the whole cinglulate gyrus, I do not perceive myself to be the
whole cholinergic limbic system, different tunings for different
functions & sector correlations can alter from small areas for newer
funtions to huge areas-connections for older functions, etc.)
after that I found it rather pleasing to go off in my stuff, and when
I ran the Buddha joking in him I found it all the more fun as that was
like several joke levels, and to get them he would have to be able to
get German, understand enlightenment, become a Buddha, and then read
what he wrote there and what I replied again.

In other words monkeying around in modern style 
and also as you did obviously not even (want to) get that I keep
saying that it are consciousnesses, and that I am not the only
conscious one in my head,  
I do not find it likely that even if you still get that article you
are really actually understanding which areas I mean, nor
understanding that this was a serious list of different areas of the
brain and saying if for my (at times pretty mistaken feeling) of the
English language these areas are meant or are not meant the ways I
heard "mind" used.

Simplified I send into the playground, I use the playground, but I am
not my playground, I am a range-data-selector into the playground and
other areas. For my perception I am part of the mind, together with
several other areas, but not the playground.
Even the adrenal glands would more up on the list as candidates for
mind sectors than the playground.
I guess I just liked nerding around that yes, sometimes the way you
write, probably for you the cingulate gyrus and all the rest is just
undifferentiated mind, and all the rest not.


It is not really relevant what I wrote there, and there is little
point in searching for that article, as it was more a reference to the
question of physical equivalents of "the mind" and not much about my
opinion about stuff in the head & body, which is that in the head and
bdoy there are different areas of different cells making bigger
systems making a big system.
It belongs together, and other places in the brain are a bit like
other organs for me.
For me some are of my CPU, some are of the sequencer, some are emotion
generators, some have different functions.
I never could perceive all in my brainsurfer times, just about nine
different systems.
(Well, some more, just not to the extent it counted much to me.)

So I never got all of them anyway.

And some I got ain't meant for human mammals abusing other mammals.

So it is pretty irrelevant.


Also you are into sleep stuff I thought and into abusing other
mammals.

For this which areas I count as mind might be more so you get ideas
where to torture other mammals more 
while researching sleep deprivation 
or some other gross stuff.


If you are older and are ever out of the whole and nothing to do with
neuros nor will, maybe some year if I am still there if it serious
interests you ask for serious, then I might answer for serious, 
but if you do not ask directly nor are willing to spend months with
the answer there might be little point in it.

>  Generally spoken, though, I do think that all areas of the brain
>contribute to the inner consciousness which we term "the mind", 

Who we?

For me there are several areas counting under the way I understand
"the mind" that are not consciousnesses.

And there is one area where in my brainsurfer times nor now I could
not perceive there well enough to know, and where several others told
me that it is conscious and where it would make sense to me that it
is, and that one I would not want to judge in this at all.

Most areas of the brain I know are not conscious (consciousness --->
Bewusstsein ---> bewusst sein).
I am, one other is, and about the one just mentioned I do not know.
The sequencer registers as prestage, and I heard about some
interesting experimenting concerning that, but I am not in the mood to
go into that, even though for a change that might be befitting the
title of this whole for a change  at least to an extent.


>Roger Sperry, Nobelist, proposed a "monist" 
>theory of brain and mind,
>saying that the mind is an emergent property of the function of the
>multiple cells and networks of the brain. The monist theory is opposed
>to dualist theory, which states that the mind is an epiphenomenon that
>cannot be explained by (in philosophical erms: "reduced to") brain
>function. Sir John Eccles was a famous dualist.


Excuse me, but for me that is both crap.

That to me is like someone saying that 
the crap is an emergent property 
of the function of the multiple cells and networks of the body, 
as the monist theory, 
and opposed by the dualist theory stating that the crap is an
epiphenomenon that cannot be explained by (in philosophical terms:
"reduced to") body.

For me the crap is to do with specific areas.



;-) Does that need an irkstlwrrrx to make your branch happier?
Then feel free to call it the  partialist  irxtlwrrrks.


>Sperry added the important principle that the emergent cproperty will
>then feed back onto the elements and control them. 

I did not understand that one.

Me, the sequencer, eg.3 and I GUESS brainstem stuff or what for me is
base,  are some main controllers.

Is he meaning the brainstem or what?

Might be esier if he were to say which systems he means and give a
practical example.

This way it sounds like generalized nonsense to me.


>The state of single neurons is influenced by the consciousness 

Where which sort of neuron influenced by which of the consciounesses?

He's a headblind.


>and the workings of the mind,
That is double for me, as me an another consciousness are parts of the
mind.
So if me or the other consciousness were to smurf around somewhere we
are areas of the mind smurfing around somewhere.

And the mere concept of single neurons for many places to me sounds
suspiciously like sense censored on top of being headblind.

How the hell does he wish to even aim at a single neuron?

I have heard some rumours about that, but he certainly would not
gargle up and spit out such nonsense if he really could do that.


(Magic Early Stoneages...)


>  Sperry's ideas actually extend to a religious extrapolation,

I noticed that a lot of belief alike in some religions would be needed
to go for such ...

> forgive me if I simplify too much 

Do I have to?  

But I guess to imprison aand abuse persons of other mammals races it
is necessary to simplify stuff and to alter data, so I guess you
neuros just need that we are not having main areas of the own I in the
cholinergic limbic system, that there is not another conscious area as
well,   and instead come up with generalized stuff like this so you
can go on with your abuses and the farmers can also go on imprisoning
others, and the meat eaters can go on eating persons of other mammal
and bird races, and so on.


(Years after discussions with other brainsurfers about experiments
within the own cholinergic I areas they did 
and many years after discussions about consciousnesses here we are
with a totally generalized brain... 
Guess consciousnesses will stay central domains of my branch, 
or at least in the LSD crash-curses, as there is lots of other stuff
that tends to be regarded as more interesting as which of the sectors
are consciousnesses. ;-) 

> One may think of God as one wishes. 

A title 

in singular or plural,

usually to do with belief stuff used as psyche crutches,

especially when it comes to not wanting the own existing deceasing
after dying nor that of loved ones.


A friend in here was like in a spotlight of weird ranges staring out
of the window behind me from where they seemed to come and babbled
about his goddess and communicating with her.

For my senses it were scanning ranges of someone else and I found the
scanning system fascinating.

I prefer "spirits" or Geist, and for energies that registered not of
Earth once here "tivar", if I have to name the others.

But for me myself they do not have names.


And the thought to give them some title is far from me.


Maybe the way I called some nerd Ph.D. who was advertising drugging
categorized people with certain emotional settings generalized into
"depressions" and after messing them up physically, too, this way,
also frying parts of their frontal cortex, and that onesided, 
I do not exclude that if one of the others started to nerd for serious
I might call them some befitting title though I am not sure if god
would be on the list.

But if some guest of mine brings another guest (of the others), or if
I am guest with a magic smurf and this one has many of the others in
his place, as long as they do not bug me too much I do not care tht
much.

I might make it distinctly clear that I do not want to do with them,
and beyond all doubt make it clear vehemently that it is O.K. if they
are with the other, but alone I do not want to do with them,
and so far there usually was not much trouble with this, so for me it
is O.K.


If others give them names likes gods or sprites or other terms and
wish to make sort of symbiontic relations or whatever it is they are
doing there, that's their thingie.

> Others called his thinking on mind and brain fuzzy. 
 ;-)  Oh how might that come?

>I agree that his writing is not completely "Westie", but it inspired me when I
>devoured it as a slightly younger man.

If you weren't a Westie and not to do with their branches nor
intending but another LSDie and younger and more logical I'd probably
be tempted to mentally kick you to paddle over the Eastpuddle for some
weekends and down the Havel and Spree till near here (;-) and give you
a magic LSD brainwashing till I nobely outSperried you for good.

Though you'll probably never get it, what I wrote at some point about
the dreaming and the occipital cortex was meant as a rather serious
comment about what you are into, as I had the impression there is some
key-stuff you overlook. 
I regret that to imprison and abuse others is more important to you
and to generalize all areas of the brain into a singularized
consciouness seems more important for you to justify what you are
doing to others.

If you want a prediction (no, I guess not ;-) nobly Sperrying you
won't far.

>  The Nobel price was awarded to Sperry for other work.
Might be a bit embarrassing if it had been for that.

> His main scientific achievements were related to brain plasticity during development, and 
>to the study of the different functional abilities of the left and right
>hemispheres. 

Sounds more interesting.

Like when programming in my playground in my brainsurfer times I
always tended to do the weaker right half first and then the left,
else left got too dominant.
Also noticed within some other brainsurfing stuff profound
differences, especially in some other brains.

One brain near Braunschweig (couple of hours drive from here) was
outright weird concerning the sides.

I don't know if he kept one eye correct and with the other &
brainstuff had some image of me done to the sides or what, but that
was a real odd brain concerning the sides.

Nice person, though.

I have a real cute looking little sort of teddy devil he was about to
sort out, with a heart on his chest saying LOVE ME, that at times used
to sit on a certain stack of books where the uppermpost one's a neuro
book with a brain picture on the cover that looked a bit similar to
one of the best internal pictures of the brain I ever got. Found the
devil on that pile of books to have a rather symbolic meaning.
Just he kept falling off it, must have been too much even for his
taste. Where's the develish fun in torturing if you sedate the
prisoners and then kill them first before slicing in them and make
pictures of the slices, and where is the fun in torturing humans if
they are aware of which areas of the brain are doing what to enjoy it?

;-)

Like the emotional difference of travelling through huge wild woods
not knowing what is at the end  and driving down a highway with an
electric navigation system on board.
I sometimes wonder if humans are aware how much they lost.


Bad spelling...(Ik gihorta dat seggen...)
Chind in chuningriche, chud is mi all irmendeot.


(....Maybe sometimes I am not even interested in people getting what I
mean. As I figure if they are wanting to get what I mean, they might
get what's coded in there, and if they do not want to get it, either
it really was probably not something important for many, like this, or
it was something I am not interested in Westies getting and they are
supposed to regard it as invented gibberish. 
Oh neuro who keepst sundry encaged.)

How about you press the inner ignore button like most here do and
ignore all that sounds like invented gibberish. Neuros are meant to.
Must be that you are from Finland and not Westie enough.
Non of the other Westies here takes my stuff even remotely serious,
and you basically want to stay Westie. How about you follow their
example.
Have you never noticed that no one in this room of the Westies tends
to take my stuff serious and reacts with writing to it?
How about you are a good Westie and follow their example.

I like you enough that I do not like to go Ph.D.Frankensteining at
you. But you have voted for staying with imprisoning and abusing
others, for the science Westie way.

What do you expect me to do?
Tell you where in persons of the mice race stick your trodes?

Forget about it.

Ci.



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net