additional =significant= info, re. the internalization of Truth, below.
Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
>mat wrote in message <43525ce3.0207230242.638247e1 at posting.google.com>...
>>> you know, Peter, taken by itself, NDT's reification of the phenomenon of
>>> "decussation" is the most-significant result that's ever been produced
in
>>> all of Science.
>>>>do you actually know what decussation is?
>>i wrote the book on it.
>>>>>>>>>>> it's easy to See that there's Prejudice operating in-there.
>>>>You claim to respect the peer-review process, then slam it when it
>>doesn't find positively in your case! Thats the whole point of the
>>process - everyone who gets rejected believe in their ideas, but few
>>others do.
>>you presume too much.
>>as far as i'm aware, only one of my papers was actually 'reviewed', and
that
>was a paper i submitted to a Journal edited by one of my Profs. he 'had' to
>do a 'review' 'cause i saw him regularly.
>>that paper was just dashed-off. all i was trying to do was get someone,
>anyone, to consider a few basic principles.
>>when i sent AoK out, it usually came back into my hands within three days.
>that means someone in the mailroom was the only one 'deciding' on it. i
>doubt it was ever read.
>>>>>>>>> which is where it becomes very-important to acknowledge Jesus, because
>the
>>> 'problem' that's 'stymied' the coming-forward of this Precious
>understanding
>>> exists 'outside' the realm of traditional Science, but, nevertheless,
>>> Dictates to folks who work in Science what it 'is' that they 'can' and
>>> 'cannot' do.
>>>>>> Jesus addressed this Dictatorial stuff.
>>>>>> and when one follows Jesus' lead, one escapes the Dictatorial stuff,
and,
>>> voila, one is able to just do Science.
>>>>>> you'll note that i've never tried to 'explain' how it could be that
~2000
>>> years ago, Jesus Knew how nervous systems process information, all i'm
>>> capable of is seeing that it's so.
>>>>Please enlighten as to how you know this? Given his supposed
>>omnipotence I would have thought that knowing how the brain works
>>would not be hard, especially as he is also supposed to have been
>>amongst those who designed it.
>>well, for instance, last night, as almost always, i read the following days
>_Old and _New Testament_ Scriptural readings. only, since my near vision is
>'going down the tubes', i 'saw' "Mat" 7: 14-15, 18-20, instead of the
actual
>"Mi" 7: 14-15, 18-20.
>>Mat.7: 14-15:"Enter through the narrow gate: for the gate is wide and the
>road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are
>many. How narrow the gate, and constricted the road that leads to life. And
>those who find it are few."
>>there, in a 'nutshell', exists a =Perfect= metaphorical statement of what's
>important with respect to TD E/I-minimization.
>>the "narrow"-ness, the "constricted"-ness, the rarity, the
>experiential-incucements of 'going-along-with-the-crowd, the Consequences.
>>substitute "TD E/I-minimization", and it's all =exactly= what happens in
the
>Biology.
>>the =whole= transcription of Jesus' stuff in the _New Testament_ is like
>this.
>>knowing how the Biology works, one can't miss-it.
>>it hits like a sledge hammer.
>>'spraned'-my-jaw when i first saw it :-)
>>>>>>>>> i've Seen such with my own eyes, right in the experimentally-verified
>neural
>>> topology and it's functioning.
>>>>>> for instance, the need for forgiveness is built-right-into nervous
>systems
>>> because they learn through experience, and experience most-often
>misleads,
>>> but such only becomes detectable subsequently.
>>>>>> without Forgiveness, one is 'trapped' within the mis-take.
>>>>This is just yadda-yadda stuff - like saying well brakes are built
>>into cars otherwise they crash. Profundity itself. This doesn't tell
>>you the detail of how it works but you go right ahead and just claim
>>everything is some illdefined concept of excitatory/inhibitory ratios.
>>that's just it. i spent 9 years working out the Biology. i was a
>'practicing', but most-often, Failing Catholic, but i was, in those years,
>still working in the hope of becoming a Professional Neuroscientist, and
was
>=just= Science in doing the research.
>>so, the result of this phase of things was definitely not "some illdefined
>concept of excitatory/inhibitory ratios".
>>the "TD E/I-minimization" short-hand is just that. one cannot fully discuss
>TD E/I-minimization without carrying the neural topology through the
>discussion. to do such, one must treat all of the Neuroanatomy, and its
>functioning.
>>as is explained in its Preface, AoK was written, with recourse to standard
>neuroanatomical and neurophysiological refs., =specifically= as a guide to
>the study of the stuff of those refs.
>>it's always been my intention to write a whole Neuroscience text.
>>but, i guess, it's not to be, 'cause no one seems to've got-it, so i'll get
>no funding, and the detailed text won't(?) be written.
>>but, in order to develop NDT, i had to work through all the detailed stuff,
>and i did.
>>so, you've got a 'point', but it's neither with respect to TD
>E/I-minimization, nor with respect to what i put into the development of
>NDT. i'll gladly go one NDT lecture to one traditional lecture in, say, any
>graduate-'level' Neuroanatomy course, and expect my lectures'll be
>more-detailed.
>>it's just not practical to write a Neuroanatomy text in little snippets in
>an online discussion 'place'.
>>so i do what i can, always working to 'light the fire' that'll carry folks
>forward, with respect to NDT's synthesis, on their own.
>>>>>>>>>>> Jesus also addressed the way old-familiar stuff is unlikely to give-way
>to
>>> new-unfamiliar stuff ["new wine is for new wineskins"], which, Darwin
>>> lamented in his _Origin of Species_ [Darwin's lament is quoted in AoK's
>>> 'Short Paper' section.]
>>>>>> and it goes on and on like this.
>>>>>> when one 'allows' one's self to See it, one's jaw, flat-out, hangs-down.
>>>>>> to me, it's just a matter of Scientific Honor.
>>>>>> yeah, i could've long-ago 'gotten-rich', if only i'd've 'put on
blinders'
>>> with respect to Jesus' Priority ['moved away from' it].
>>>>>> but it was already old-long-since that i'd come to understand the
>>> Consequences inherent in 'moving away from' Truth.
>>>>>> to the degree that one 'moves away from' Truth, one becomes incapable of
>>> actually doing anything Real.
>>>>>> 'moving away from' Truth, in fact, to the degree of such, cast[s] one
>outside
>>> of Reality [i don't expect anyone to understand this. it's Deep.]
>>>>lol. its so very very deep. I profess not to understand. some ego
>>ken.
>>OK, try it in the 'vernacular'.
>>'moving away from' Truth, in fact, to the degree of such, leaves one
capable
>of only pursuing B. S. :-)
>>'fantasy'
>>going on 'random walks', 'cause there's not the stuff [Truth] in-there with
>respect to which the "road" can become "constricted". no "narrow gate",
only
>the "broad" way, where it just doesn't matter what one Chooses, 'cause,
>since there's no Truth in-there, there's no such thing as rigorous
>cross-correlation.
>>such a one 'exists outside of reality'.
>>this stuff has been in AoK all along, BTW.
>>>>>Your ideas are just 'romantic' whimsy (i.e. daft) for instance, you
>>claim not to move away from truth. How do you know beforehand what
>>truth is, since by definition you cannot know otherwise you wouldn't
>>need to do any science. How do you differentiate truth from
>>non-truth? In short, how can you know you are moving toward the true
>>answer without a priori having the truth known?
>>tisk, tisk, 'mat', i've already discussed such over and over again, and
it's
>all right-there in AoK, in particular, Ap7.
>>one follows the one 'map' of WDB2T over the course of =long= experience.
>>when one strays from WDB2T, TD E/I(up) happens, and vice versa.
>>over 'time', through the by-production of "biological mass" AoK, Ap5
>{"microscopic trophic [growth] modifications" that directly-'reflect' the
>actual neural activation that's occurred develop[s].
>>this "biological mass" exerts behavioral inertia by exerting physical
>inertia within the neural topology.
>>to the degree of one's Choice [see the "volitional diminishing-returns
>decision", AoK, Ap7] to do the information-processing work inherent [to the
>degree that one Chooses the "narrow gate"], the "biological mass" gradually
>comes to ever-more 'coincide' with WDB2T.
>>voila! Truth has become internalized.
additional info:
in the process briefly outlined above, it's =crucial= to experience
=widely=, otherwise, TD E/I-minimization can converge within some WDB2T
local-minimum. such 'works', while one's experience remains within the WDB2T
local-minimum, but it's "rendered useless" [AoK, Ap8] when one ventures
outside of that experientially-familiar TD E/i-local minimum. [as a
consequence of this TD E/I-minimization 'short-sighted-ness', all the
correlates of "rendering useless" unfold with 'power' commensurate with the
relative-unfamiliarity of the extra-TD E/I-local-minimum environment. such
"rendering useless", and its correlated Consequences, are happening all over
the place, in our 'modern times', because of accelerated 'globalization'.
which is why communication of the understanding is becoming, rapidly,
more-important. [See AoK, Ap8 for more discussion.]
so, it's good, if laborious, to experience =widely=. such allows this or
that TD E/I-local-minima [WDB2T-local-minima] to be seen for what they are,
not Truth, but stuff having only-local 'usefulness'. the most-useful thing
to do with such stuff is to see its divergence from Truth, and to 'connect'
it in-Truth - build a 'bridge' over which folks can 'travel' without having
to suffer any artificially-constructed "rendering useless", working to
eliminate any developing "inward spiral" behavioral dynamics [AoK, Ap8].
anyway, understanding how, and why, nervous systems process-information via
TD E/I-minimization =greatly= facilitates all that's inherent in the
acquisition of such wide experience, because it makes it possible to
'pass-through' all the stuff that, sans the understanding, gets heaped-up in
one's experiential path.
when the understanding is shared, it flat-out changes everything among
interactors who share the understanding.
no more 'getting-stuck' within Waste-filled, and often Savagely-Destructive,
"inward spiral" stuff [AoK, Ap8].
there's no 'magic' in any of this.
Truth is Knowable be-cause WDB2T maps Truth everywhere within physical
reality.
depending on the information-processing work one Chooses to do,
internalization of Truth is not only possible, everything that's necessary
is innate within nervous systems, =except= "NDT's understanding", which,
when established in-there, 'evicts' 'the Beast', Abstract Ignorance, making
the internalization of Truth 'just' what a nervous system incorporating the
understanding does.
Jesus got things sorted-out ~2000 years ago.
taken that long for 'humanity' to get-it.
a ~2000-year-long 'gestation' period for the Birth of Humanity. kpc [one
more additional comment, below].
>>it works be-cause WDB2T permeates all of physical reality, including the
>stuff of nervous systems, their topological mapping, and their functioning.
>>when one begins to get-it, watch out for 'falling-jaws', 'cause it 'gets
>one's attention' =real-good= :-)
>>>>>> it's why i can accept any peer-reviewed, replicable, experimental
results
>as
>>> Tests of the work i've done. it's why i can enhance any such
experimental
>>> results and predict the yield of the enhanced experiments.
>>>>Cite one published paper that confirms any of what you've said
>>(without abstratcing to a infinitely higher level). Or are all
>>neuroscience papers somehow proof of your ideas, since of course your
>>ideas are the truth.
>>i've a standing offer to do exactly that, in-person, before fair witnesses
>[on the condition that there's a good Neuroscience Library close-at-hand,
>and that i'll be able to gather up to 100, or so, correlated refs. for use
>in the discussion, along with the 'time' to do the on-the-spot analysis.
>[preferably, in some relatively-tranquil place, where there are three or
>four folks who Love Neuroscience, but i'll take what i can get, adjusting
my
>'style', accordingly.]
i prefer that other folks Choose the Tests. so the view that the work
entailed is, somehow, 'rigged' by me. kpc
>>really, 'mat', AoK is =all= such, but one has to read the refs. while using
>AoK as a guide to their synthesis. [the refs. are all the stuff produced
via
>experiment. it's done thousands of 'times' in AoK. one just has to read the
>refs. cited in AoK. i went through the entirety of the Neuroscience stacks,
>as they then existed, while developing NDT. [did so because i was 'naive'
>re. how Neuroscience is approached via 'specialization'. i'd come from
>Physics, in which one was, then, expected to study comprehensively. i just
>went at the Neuroscience in the same way. almost Killed me.
>>anyway, i'm 'embarassed' at what i accomplished. i wish =not= to 'offend',
>but the work is =DONE=.
>>just haven't been able to get it published, or win any funding that'd allow
>me to do AoK's 2nd Edition.
>>i've no 'control' with respect to such matters, and want none.
>>but, as it is said, "hope springs eternal".
>>and "I'm going to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer." [U. S.
>Grant]
>>only, i've only got a couple of weeks that i can remain online.
>>maybe i can stretch-it by adjusting my diet.
>>tried pop-corn and baked-beans the other night.
>>surprisingly-good :-)
>>the pop-corn gives it some chew-worthy 'texture' .
>>i Love to 'chew' on stuff.
>>ken [k. p. collins]
>>
