IUBio

thalamus and cognition

Cijadrachon cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Fri May 21 08:12:51 EST 1999


If the question should be if the sequencer can think, yes, 
if the question is did the sequencere come to cognito ergo sum, no,
mine not,  if the question is if the sequencer can process exernal
data, then in my brain in many forms probably many more times than me
can even linked with other systems of my CPU.
If the question is if the thalamus is the center of the sequencer, I
am not entirely sure about that one and prefeer to keep my guesses to
myself about that.
If the question is if the thalamus is all just one part and just one
single function, no, it is of several parts.
The thalamus is in cooperation with other systems like the striata,
and if I were to guess like me also gets more parallel tracking powers
using frontal cortex stuff (in that we seem alike a bit, and also in
some other stuff), and I am not sure if it is wise to regard a system
of several parts like a unit not to do with other units.


... If the qeustion is what is the relation if the own thinking and
the other thinker, that is not the same in people.

In those called autist the sequencer's and the own thinking capacities
are often running segregated for long times.
Because the own areas for physical, psychological or both reasons are
off-lining with other areas, the sequencer might for long stretches
have central navigation control.  In this case even with physical
damages some of the thinking capacities of the sequencer might surpass
those of sysetems where the own areas are not leaving the sequencer in
central control alone that long but are far more supervising.

The most extreme form I heard of for sequencer intelligence training
had to do with experimental subordinating the own I of a person (to me
not registering as MBD nor as "autist") to the sequencer.

As mentioned before in othr texts I'd not count the sequencer among
the consciousnesses of the humn brain, but as as being on a prestage.
The other person said that his experiments seemed to have "ncreased
the sequencer degree towards beccoming one of the consciousnesses,
too, considerably.

The experiments as such to me seemed to have been the type of fanatic
own central power powering towards something in extreme forms for a
while, to then discard such experimenting for other stuff and trying
something new there.

I remember that when he told me about that I shortly considered hwat
he had done in other forms for me and decided that for my systems it
did not seem a good idea and did not seriously have a good go at that
one.


Maybe next time if you gave a better definition of what you mean by
cognition, it would be easier to understand for people for whom your
language is foreign what you mean. 

I was really not sure how to translate that one and the question, as
the translations I tried duee to the vague uses of the term here in
that room sw to sevarl options, and those tended to see to no
discerning in the question between the own and the sequencers
cognition.

There are vast differences between the own and the sequencer's
cognition in my brain, and I guess in that of many called "autists"
who are wanting that most is always in the same placee, so the
sequencer can find and do stuff alone and oneself does not have to
strain with linking and proceessing data  which sucks. 

When I once wrote some private book about the mind, there was an
entire chapter about the sequencer alone if I recall right, and some
of the differences, and some other stuff. The way I translated the
question it is a very far-going question and something that within my
branch one could run several entire LSD sessions about.
It might be easier if you easier stick it to the functions of the
single parts of the thalamus and with that turn to the brain-cutters
and maimers here, and maybe get Frankie to rattle off
about nuclei and irxtlwrrrks about anterior, lateral dorsal, medial
dorsal, ventral anterior, ventral lateral, bentral posterior, lateral
geniculate, medial geniculate, lateeral posterior, centromedian,
central lateral parafascicular stuff & pulvinar, etc., and to get Dag
to talk about energy stuff.  If you keep it to functions and leave out
vague wording and theorizing, then you might get further here in this
room, then if you ask for theories.
If you are looking for more general stuff maybe also to do with
theories, and it is important for you, maybe find yourself many of
those called autist who want most in the same place 
who can still speak. I advise to discern between MBD sorts and no MBD
seeming there. Ask about what the "autopilot" (what I call the
sequencer, but autopilot is  more commonly understood term) can do
when they are segregated off the outside to inside, with what problems
"they find it stuck when returning", 
and what it cannot do, 
and what they know about the autopilot
and what they theorize about it.

Collect the statements and compare.


With the non-speaking ones if it does not harass the person(s),
observe the eyes  if you have not learned yet to observe to what
extent the sequencer and to what extent the own I are in central
navigation supervising. 

Some of the non-MBDs seem to bee able to run far more tracks parallel.

There is a book called something like "I never promised you a
rosegarden". I am not sure if that one was based on real stuff, but it
nearly sounded like a non-MBD being mentally tortured by some
psychiatrists who disturbed an internal phase that is very important
and where disturbances the way they were caused there can be highly
dangerous for the person.   

The non-MBDs and the MBDs short of mentally handicapped might also
show differences when docking off to the inside.

Some of the MBDs might sort of straight go to a kind of black void and
relax, or have the physical triggering rate of daydreams considerably
higher than with the "psychological autists".

If there are daydreams also the daydream-structures might show
significant differences (also to do parallel tracking powers, so
someone with the own areas and the "front computer" damaged might have
ways less than a "psychological autist", and might have stronger
sector segregations, less ability to follow long eveen if wanting to)
and there might also be more motoric damages in MBDs.

When asking MBDs about splitting of the autopilot and what it can do
in that time, it is also to be considered that the autopilot areas and
systems it is  lot to do with  might have damages as well.


In other words if asking for the thalamus here I recommend to keep the
question to exact physical functions of the subareas, 
or to take the entire sequencer/autopilot and ask people who tend to
have the own areas and those running split long times about what they
know and what they believe about that.

Interesting by the way for the extremists into such might also be
colour perception when the sequencer is in central eyes control or
oneself is seeing or is "seeing".



To simplify an answer to your question very much you are seeming to
overlook the fornix and other stuff, and that it makes a difference if
the own areas are linked with the sequencer or the sequencer is alone
in central motoric sequences supervising.
As long as you are not specifying what it is you want to know or what
for, it might be a bit hard to answer a question as general as the one
you asked without going into a stack of Chengy-volumes.
The differences between how much the thinkers link in different people
and what role that plays also concerning the physical hareware is not
going to make the answering easier.

As most would not want to spend too much of their life rattling down
stuff about the thalamus, there might also be a distinct desinterest
to go off forever and a day about  what area of the thalamus is doing
what  and what it has to do with other areas, 
or to go off about the thinking capacities of the sequencer and the
own areas and relations between them in different people(s).



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

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