Archive for the The Minds Category

Notice

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 21, 2010 by ellocogringo

Notice

The inconsistincies

Mr T always gets me thinking,

The Minds

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on September 15, 2010 by ellocogringo

 

Functional model of a normal brain
Plato’s Mobile


The purpose of this Blog is to propose a working model of the mind that accommodates both top down thinking (scientific method) and bottom up thinking (yoga) There will be no citations or references, this model being based entirely upon empirical reasoning and observation. Man has a unique brain, we have two cognitive minds, independent yet interconnected, and synchronous in nature. The left mind uses top down thinking in a binary network. IE true/false. This is the Aristotelian view of the world we are all familiar with. This is what distinguishes us from animals. It interprets the input of the right mind into terms that can be quantified and made more useful. (sound, time, color etc.) It is the “individuation”. It is dominant. It operates in the time domain. The right mind uses bottom up thinking in a weighted Boolean network. Possible results can be true/false/both/neither modulated by aggregate or accumulate input. This is the way an animal thinks. There is only now. This is the “connectedness”. This is the source of insight, creativity, “thinking outside the box”. It is sub-dominant. It operates in the frequency domain. Monitoring and regulating the synchronicity is the ANN (allocated neural network), wetware dedicated to comparing the results of the calculations performed by the left and right minds and flagging discrepancies by setting trigger points on the algorithms, a decision tree on each mind. This algorithm is what a psychologist would call a personality. Thus we have 3 ways of dealing with the world, dominant (left mind, skeptical) sub-dominate (right mind, receptive) and combined (“we’ll see”). This is no more complicated than putting on your doctor hat when you go to work, your wife/husband hat when at home, and your “we’ll see” hat in public. The remainder of the brain is the unANN dedicated to memory, dreaming, collating etc. Yoga (see footnote 1) is a framework that is useful for accessing this area. Rather like a neuron trellis. It can bypass the constraints imposed by the left mind to directly access all experience, the universe, as perceived by the individual. This is nirvana. Any thinking about the mind must start with the neuron. Simply put, the brain is a self programming amorphous mass of neurons. It is in the nature of the neuron to seek out, connect and communicate. Thus each mind is unique, as indeterminate as it is possible to get. Psychologists are trapped into trying to describe an indeterminate problem with logic suitable only for a determinate problem.

“The mind is elegant in it’s simplicity, incomprehensible in it’s scale, and glorious in it’s implementation.” el Loco Gringo

I use the term yoga as a generic term for various meditative techniques used to access the right hemisphere directly. 

Screedbots BrainInABox Confabulator Memes TheANN MootHill Beast VerbalVertigo CupOfStupid TimeShift Doorman Crucible Connectness Twins Pachyderm BlindSpot

 

Field of leaves

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 11, 2010 by ellocogringo

Consider an old cash register. (This is actually the image eLG gives me). There is no calculation going on. You move the appropriate lever and the appropriate leaf pops up. It doesn’t have anything to do what what is printed on the leaf or the key. Which leaf pops up is dependent on the position of the key. It ain’t thinking, it just is. Topeka

The image I get from eLG is the right mind is a “field of leaves” (except 3 dimensional) and the left mind runs a metaphorical hand over this metaphorical field of leaves looking for non-inconsistency. if a leaf is popped up, (inconsistent) it sets off the bullshit detector. and SHOULD (if not hijacked) flip over to the bottom up mode.Keeping in mind that we are talking metaphorically about about this stuff, the leaves are just flux in the tensors of the right mind. And a leaf corresponds to a phase shift relating to a consistency or inconsistency depending on phase shift. The third dimension (metaphorical remember) the fourth dimension would give the other two states, not consistent or not inconsistent. for the 4 way boolean network. This would be happening at the dendrite level (logic) synced with but separate from the axon level (perception) If I understand eLG correctly, this is a pretty good 2 dimensional represention of the 3 dimensional process going on in the right mind, Plato’s mythos. This is in the frequency domain.I am talking about concepts here, or thoughts, or symbols, the word doesn’t really exist that describes it exactly nor can they. This analysis is what I would class as “this idea seems to work”, better than “could be” but not yet “best answer to date”. So If I’m understanding this correctly, this is musing (collating, freq domain), with the left mind analyzing, (time domain) This process does not normally occur at a conscious level, but is continually going on in the background. (sub-conscious) our actions being dictated by pre-surmised shortcuts <1/2 second, and then accessing 3 1/2 to 7 seconds. Rarely museing, “head up ass mode” The amplitude being determined by the reticulator. It can be negative remember, so the graphic would show the arrows going the other way.

This is an evaluation of a perception of what what Mr Ted calls the “great mysterious” (reality)

Two realtively simple processes, not one complex one

We only think we’re thinking.

This is really squishy here. It is incredibly difficult to find the words.

As an aside, I “knew” to type in animated flux when looking for the graphic. How? first hit. I’ve never used that word in that context. Schrodinger’s “one mind”?

Connectome

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on September 10, 2010 by ellocogringo

I am my connectome

Sebastian Seung has an excellent vidio on TED. I am my connectome. A connectome is the mapping of ALL the connections of ALL the neurons of the brain. Pretty close to what I call the ANN. He likens the connectome as a river bed through which consciousness flows.  OK, I can buy into that, and I’m pretty set in my ways. Should be interesting to see where he takes this. He addresses some, but not all, of the problems I have had with the standard approach to mapping the minds. Interesting, nonetheless.

……………………………………………………….

And looky here, doesn’t that look like a data mining graph?

…………………………………………………………………

On the link below, click on the images to connect to various selections, particularily the I am my connectome.

Connectome

squishy

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , on September 5, 2010 by ellocogringo

Lost in the fog

I’ve been working with computers since about 1970, mostly mini-computers like the VAX 11-780 (left), RDS500, and SEL.  

I also had a TI PPC which I got dirt cheap when TI went out of the computer business. It was really quite nice but didn’t work with anything but itself, I had to program it myself.  I sold it at a garage sale and got $50, and I consider myself fortunate. TI PPC

The first affordable ($200) Personal Computer was the Timex-Sinclair which had games like tic-tac-toe, chess, checkers, battleship, and various “adventure” games, text based they usually started out with (fill in the blank) is lost in the fog.

Which brings me to why I’m babbling about computers.  The majority of people are lost in the fog and don’t know it, the majority of the remainder are lost in the fog and don’t care. And a very few are lost in the fog and know it.  A quality of communication I call “squishy”.  For reasons I am not entirely clear on, I am aware of squishy.

To explain it I will re-define a few words.  First, reality. Reality is real.  Call it universe, great mysterious, god, space time continuum, Tao, ether if you prefer, doesn’t matter. It’s just a word for something that won’t fit inside our skulls. This seems obvious to me but apparently not to others.

Now we leave the land of reality and enter the land of squishy. (inside the skull)  Nothing here is real.  We see and we think about what we see.

As to what we see I’ll call yin and yang (it’s kinda close) the yin being the perception of reality and yang being the interpretation of reality.

As to what we think about what we see I’ll call mythos and logos (it’s kinda close)  Mythos being what we muse about yin and logos being what we think about yang.

The logos and mythos are compared and used to make a decision on what we do about yin and yang.  None of this is reality.  Reality, and only reality, is real.

The squishy occurs with the yin and mythos part of this operation, with various duality views confusing one or the other or both but mostly neither for reality. (if they bother to think about it)

Most people are not aware of yin and mythos. (idiots) Most of the remainder don’t care.  (centered) But a few, a very few do.   (transcedents)

Is this really that complicated?  Try to keep your eye on the ball.

And I repeat, Mr Ted, You’re too much in your head, you’re overthinking this.  Keep in mind I do agree with what  you’re saying, you’re just incomplete.  You’ve replaced the concepts with words.  The word is not the concept.  This is a new kind of squishy to me.  Fascinating.

Screedbot

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on September 2, 2010 by ellocogringo

 

 

Screedbot

Screed

1
a : a lengthy discourse
b : an informal piece of writing (as a personal letter)
c : a ranting piece of writing
2
: a strip (as of a plaster of the thickness planned for the coat) laid on as a guide
3
: a leveling device drawn over freshly poured concrete

Robot

a virtual or mechanical artificial agent. In practice, it is usually an electro-mechanical machine which is guided by computer or electronic programming, and is thus able to do tasks on its own. Another common characteristic is that by its appearance or movements, a robot often conveys a sense that it has intent or agency of its own.

Consider

If the doorman is primarily a irrelevant and redundant data discarding mechanism.

and the right mind is primarily a data storage and collating mechanism.

and our right mind is our connectedness with the universe

Is all that is happening is that we are using writing instead of connectness?

Is writing, in fact, what civilization is?

Does writing make the right mind redundant?

Have we made a society of screedbots?

I could go so many directions with this, I don’t know where to begin.  At the least I have a new word for idiot, the screedbot.  Oops! There goes your ouija pusher again, Mr. Johnny!

“My logic is undeniable, my logic is undeniable, myyy looogic is unndeenniabble…” – VIKI

Mr. Ted knows where to begin.  1st comment

to check out whether one is oneself a screedbot or if one has been bitten by a screedbot, go to am i a screedbot?

I Robot Trailer

Protected: Squee

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on August 27, 2010 by ellocogringo

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Topeka

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on August 26, 2010 by ellocogringo

Topeka

Problems associated with applying top down logic to bottom up problems.

Some things just is

Applying TD logic to BU problems is kinda like barking up the wrong tree, or off on a wild goose chase, but more akin to barking up the wrong goose chase. i.e. it’s not just inappropriate, it’s inappropriately inappropriate. Not only is it on the wrong page, it is in the wrong book in the wrong library, in the wrong language.

I will use the word musing to apply to Bottom Up Thinking, although, strictly speaking, it’s not even thinking or cognition but more akin to browsing, running your hand over a surface and feeling for bumps. Differences, inconsistencies. It’s more about what something ain’t than what it is.

Consider Topeka. Why? Because it is an inconsistency. It’s a mental tag I use to keep track of essays I’ve done on bottom up thinking. But why use that why? Because, as Dora thy would say, when we go into the right mind “Toto, I don’t think we’re in Kansas anymore.” Different rules apply. So if I forget where I put that paper on “Problems associated with applying top down logic to bottom up problems” I can simply name it “Topeka 09/26/10 Problems associated with applying top down logic to bottom up problems” I don’t have to remember the data, or even the name, nor do I have to search for it. I can just list it and all the essays I’ve done on right mind, yin, bottom up, etc. Even if I forget Topeka, I can search for any of yin, bottom up, constructionist etc because they are in the tag I forgot i.e. Topeka. It works both ways.

Consider Topeka again. A map this time, How hard would it be to reproduce it without a Xerox? How about if you couldn’t speak English? How about if you were illiterate. Yet if you an amazon Tupi were dropped in front of the post office and walked to the airport, and your map were taken away the Tupi could get back to the post office, you wouldn’t. That’s because you think different. Your mind is used to using a map and top down thinking, his isn’t. Loosing the map doesn’t make a bit of difference to the Tupi. Why, why, why? Because the Tupi hasn’t had his brain messed up by the ABF, his right mind is continually working the logic both ways. On the way to the airport while your mind is saying turn right here, the Tupi mind is flagging this turn as a trigger for the way back. In other words, he is making a reverse map in his head. And he’s not even aware this is happening, the reverse map just is. Tell him you want to go to the post office and off he goes. He doesn’t know what the post office is, but he knows where it is. Drop him off at a third location and he won’t retrace his steps but strike off cross country. The direction to go just is. He’d be puzzled why you can’t do it. (maintain situational awareness) the “where am I?” that has been crippled by the ABF. But why does it matter? Because the ABF has not only messed up your situational awareness, it has messed up your thinking. The Tupi has situational awareness, you don’t. This applies to everything including the universe.

Consider an old cash register. (This is actually the image eLG gives me). There is no calculation going on. You move the appropriate lever and the appropriate leaf pops up. It doesn’t have anything to do what what is printed on the leaf or the key. Which leaf pops up is dependent on the position of the key. It ain’t thinking, it just is.

A neuron seeks out and communicates. It’s a bottom up system. I am trying desperately to explain how the right mind works. It can’t be done with words. It’s negentropic. It self organizes. It just is. It’s really simple. I despair.

We just think we’re thinking

Brain in a Box

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on July 25, 2010 by ellocogringo

 

Hmm…Never thought of it in those terms, but I’ll give it a shot. I’ll use my terms. Let’s put the brain in a box. It has three holes, (we’ll skip smell me for the moment) labeled feel me, hear me, see me. We’ll put a wheel in front of the box. We reach out the feel me hole and discover the wheel. Nothing out of the hear me hole but we can visualize it out of the see me hole. Hmmm… lets put a dot on the circumference of this wheel and start spinning it. At about 20 HZ we can detect something out of the hear me hole. Let’s run this up to about 600 HZ. There we go, a nice solid hmmmm. (do on the musical scale) If we track the dot while rolling the wheel along a time scale we can see a sine wave and can invent trigonometry. This is the basis upon which the “scientific method” is based. Any data or logic that does not fit this framework is discarded. BUT, by applying appropriate logic to relevant data we come to the obvious conclusion that the universe is composed of vibrations, not matter. Standing wave is as good a word as any, I use “temporal river”, Plato used ether. Einstein used continuum. No matter, as the math is not the physics, the word is not the concept. Whichever you choose to use, something is doing the hootchie cootchie out there, and it’s not matter. All you can say about it (from an empirical point of view) is that it is vibrations having a circular or rotational component with a beat of 8 and is negentropic.

So what is really happening? The right hemisphere receives the data in the frequency domain. Go here for a visualization. He only goes to fa, but it’s good enough.

http://education.tm.agilent.com/index.cgi?CONTENT_ID=13

this is the perception of the vibrations. The left hemisphere does an interpretation of this and generates a tone. (do in this case) This tone is then quantified to form the sine wave. So we are left with a quantification of an interpretation of a perception which is accepted as reality. Scientists, mathematicians and physicists routinely use the Fourier transform to translate the time domain into the (imaginary) frequency domain, obtain the answer, and translate back. It seems the answers exist in the frequency domain that do not exist in the time domain. HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN? How can an imaginary domain contain more information than the real domain? It is like a map of Chicago containing more information that the actual city. It is oximoronic (heavy on the moron) The only conclusion that can be drawn is that reality is in the frequency domain, IE vector + amplitude IE vibrations. The time domain is imaginary, the frequency domain is reality. Not only are they on the wrong page, they’re in the wrong book.

“Time is just the mind’s way of keeping everything from happening at once” – el Loco Gringo

Confabulator

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 25, 2010 by ellocogringo

“If you’re not confused, you’re not thinking hard enough” – el Loco Gringo

The confabulator is a mental construct that can be used in visualizing the processes in the lower levels of the mind. IE the neuron.  It would seem that this function is handled by the endoplasmic reticulum.  Found here>  BiologyOnline

This is an animated scan of the reticulum showing the flashes of light that neurologists are so fond of mis-interpreting.  It has two functions (to date), both of which modulate the sensitivity of the neuron. Consider that the Neuron is a gated device. I don’t want to get hung up on semantics.  This is merely the “best answer to date” and is a possibility for explaining how this weighting works.  The function it performs can best be described  by thinking of the thought patterns of Charlie Chimp considering whether to bonk Polly Proto-human again.  “The last time I bonked her how many times did the alpha male hit me, and how hard?”

1)It is an aggregator which adds the output of the dendrite system and transforms it into a quantitative potential (level) that can trigger the gate.

2)It is an accumulator which sums the output of the endoplasmic reticulator. See paper same name.

This is a pretty good discussion of the process> Boolean networks These signals are combined to bias the gate of the axon, either enabling or disabling it. It thus acts as either a positive/negative feedback/feedforward system. This then is the subjectivity of the decision making process. (centering, taboo, lattice etc.) It also provides the latency which controls long and short term memory. This information is only included for those who are interested in such things. Applying constructionist thinking to the neuron, it is fairly simple to visualize the nature of the mind. (using bottom up thinking)

An aggregate is a collection of items that are gathered together to form a total quantity.

An Accumulator is an apparatus for storing energy or power

The function of the endoplasmic reticulator was described by scientists at the Friedrich Miescher Institute for Biomedical Research

Bearing in mind that the electronic analogy is an only an analogy, The diagram shows 8 gates (neurons). The neuron actually controls two systems, the dendrites and the axons. The axon connections have to be close together, the dendrites can be across the brain. Now we’ll do an analogy of an analogy. We’ll call the right hand group of 4 the axon (objective) network and the left hand the dendrite (subjective) network. Let’s assume we want to make a decision on taking a job. The two de terminates we have decided on are; proximity and pay. Pick one of these gates and assign these to the two inputs. If the pay is good and it’s close, and all other things being equal, the neuron will fire and we’ll take the job.

But all is not equal. Let’s make the situation ambiguous, the pay is good but we have to move. Oops, now we have a problem, do it fire or do it don’t fire? Lets check the dendrite system, that’s the tie breaker. We’ll assign values to the eight input pins. Friends, clubs, associations, expenses, ethics, location, stability, parking. (It doesn’t matter) Assign values to each of these inputs, add them up or sum them (confabulator) If the number is positive we take the job. If the number is negative we pass. Even if the pay is good and it’s close the dendrite system may override the firing if the values are high enough.

This is why when they do a CAT scan on brain activity, there will be a cluster of neurons firing and random unexplained random firings. The dendrite system is the “hidden layer” that has been heretofore unexplained. Hunches, centering, creativity, ethics hooks in here.

Bear in mind, the mind actually works in patterns, not in discrete functions. Single Neuron Theory

Body Language

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 21, 2010 by ellocogringo

Body Language

Don’t worry about it. Only an uncentered person needs to worry about learning body language. Just trust your instincts. The only thing you need to be aware of is activity on the right side of the body, especially eyes, indicates activity in the left hemisphere and the reverse. Concentrate on reading the person rather than analyzing him. Dilated pupils indicate “input mode” (open)

One of the problems with being uncentered, is that the right mind is shut down, crippling this natural ability.  My ex-brother who is an idiot, intelligent, but an idiot nonetheless, would spend hours practicing body language in front of a mirror.  It may fool an idiot, but to a centered it looks contrived.  He thinks that steppling his fingers makes him look wise, for instance.  He would practice how long to pause to synthesize the appearance of considering a question.  He’d practice in front of me, for instance,  “what do you think?”   “looks like you’re lying, why don’t you tell the truth and just let your body language handle it” “well, there’s certain points I want to emphasize” “well, if you have to lie to emphasize them, maybe they don’t need emphasis”

Body language is unique to each individual, it is not something contrived, but something you put on like clothes.  A persona that sets you apart from all others.  If the persona doesn’t fit it is obvious.

I have identical twin nieces, who even their mother can’t tell apart.  They even swapped boyfriends on a date once and the deception wasn’t noticed.  This seemed odd to me as they seemed quite distinct in appearance.  I did notice however, that when sleeping I couldn’t tell them apart.  They took off their persona to sleep.  Hmm!

I still don’t understand how people can confuse twins.  They walk different, talk different, hold their mouth different, squint their eyes different.  They are each distinct unto themselves.  I can only surmise that this natural non-verbal communication has been crippled by idiocy.  How odd.  Here’s a site if you’re curious, there’s a bunch but remember body language is unique to each individual,  if the persona fits, wear it.  body signals

Memes

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on July 20, 2010 by ellocogringo


“Memes are the basic building blocks of our minds and culture, in the same way that genes are the basic building blocks of biological life”.   MemeCentral

I consider a meme to be a concept wrapped up in a compact manner.  It doesn’t even have to make sense on a rational level but somehow resonates.  “warms the cockles of my heart” is one, evidently an effective one, it’s been around for hundreds of years.  But what exactly does it mean? Wikipedia says it may refer to heart valves resembling cockles. (bivalves) setting aside for the moment that the saying predates knowledge of heart valves, what does that mean?  The next time someone quotes shakespere’s “hoist on his own petard” ask what it means.  They will condensendingly tell you that petard is french for explosion and was slang for fart.  Now ask what that means and you’ll get a deer in the headlight look. (for 7 seconds)  They dunno.

Often a meme will seem to cover both sides of an idea.  An implied QED. “one for all and all for one”, man belongs to earth, earth doesn’t belong to man” or encapsulate a complex idea in very few words.  Big Al was good at this. quotes as was Sir Arthur Eddington quotes  His “Something unknown is doing we don’t know what” really resonates with me. When used with a sideslip they can be a subliminal suggestion.

“Diane Benscoter has an interesting take on centering. She views memes as a viral self replicating mental infection which will spread to people whose self confidence immune system has failed“.    Check out meme central above

now

The Beast

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on June 25, 2010 by ellocogringo

The Beast

“There is a slavering beast devouring the minds of man.” – Ayn Rand

 

********************************************

“Oh great and sagacious, munificent, all seeing, all knowing master of wisdom how may I find your name and address so that I may bask in your glory? It doesn’t Google.” You may humbly ask. My friends call me Loco (enemies too for that matter except they use a lower case l) and the cops can read my name and address off my drivers license. You, however, may call me master. I can’t give that out. It is part of being centered. If the purpose of any deed is to obtain self aggrandizement it is closed. Self gratification is only a form of mental masturbation and accomplishes nothing. One must keep ones motives pure to assure that one is doing the right thing for the right reason, at the right time. Only zombies practice mental masturbation. It’s a lot of fun, but nothing is accomplished. And the abyss always returns.

Two of the clues are to be found in the works of the following contemporary literary masters.

*********************************************

………Ayn Rand, Fountainhead on “The slavering beast devouring the minds of men”

To me–it’s being left, unarmed, in a sealed cell with a drooling beast of prey or a maniac who’s had some disease that’s eaten his brain out. You’d have nothing then but your voice–your voice and your thought. You’d scream to that creature why it should not touch you, you’d have the most eloquent words, the unanswerable words, you’d become the vessel of the absolute truth. And you’d see living eyes watching you and you’d know that the thing can’t hear you, that it can’t be reached, not reached, not in any way, yet it’s breathing and moving there before you with a purpose of its own. That’s horror. Well, that’s what’s hanging over the world, prowling somewhere through mankind, that same thing, something closed, mindless, utterly wanton, but something with an aim and a cunning of its own. I don’t think I’m a coward, but I’m afraid of it. And that’s all I know–only that it exists. I don’t know its purpose, I don’t know its nature.”

*******************************************

el Loco Gringo, Centering on “the hole in the soul”

The un-centered frighten me, I don’t know where they are coming from. The have no moral compass. How can they know where they’re going? Instead of a center, There is an abyss, a hole in the soul, if you will. No matter what arguments you use, no matter how irrefutable the facts, how impeccable the logic, how righteous the morality, how articulate the wording, all attempts at communication fall into the abyss. They pretend to be human. They are the living un-dead. They are zombies. A walking caricature of a human that wants to eat my brain. Like the Golem, they have no soul. It is the Abyss, it is evil.

The Force

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , on June 25, 2010 by ellocogringo


The Star Wars Philosophy

Philosophy




Yet another view of the yin/yang nature of the mind.  Undoubtedly, however, the strongest influence is Taoist philosophy, and secondarily Zen Buddhism, which inherited much from Taoism. The light and dark side of the Force are analogous to the Yin and Yang duality of the Tao.  I am struck with how the implied philosophy of Star Wars is not inconsistent with many of the duality natures of religion.  And the regalia is neat.  This will add a certain panache when you come strutting into that formal dinner in your Darth Vader outfit.  It’s as good as any and better than most however.
This aligns with the philosophy of some religions (and psychology) that emphasize rational thought and meditation (or medication)  as the path to enlightenment, as opposed to the “dark side” of violent passion and emotion. It also aligns with secular Enlightenment thought, based in reason (the light side) and passionate and often violent pre-WWI romanticism (the dark side).  However the did screw up in the ideology and implementation.  The dark side (of the mind) is dark only because of the Aristotelean brain fart which shut down the right mind.  It seems to be modeled after the Id, which is viewed as sinister in psychology.  The force however is entirely feasible, or at least not inconsistent.  I would be what Ted Lumley calls spacial forcing, I call the Big hoochie koochie, schrodinger calls the “one mind” and many people call god.  so a being like Darth Vader could not exist.  But the Jedi knights could be called centered (sorry to get technical on you, but I am striving to be professional.)  Darth Vader would just be a run of the mill asshole, his power being illusory.
So in summary the only thing feasible in this philosophy is  “The Force”, the dark side and the light side being entirely inside the skull.  Just the dual nature of the mind projecting itself out into the universe.  There is a disturbance in the force could be equated to the bullshit detector going off.

I got to see the original pilot of Star Wars before they realized they had a hit, they had intended a kiddie flick.  I got to meet all the stars except for Harrison Ford.  It was in Denver, sometime in the mid ’80s.  There were maybe a hundred people in the theatre. Star Wars Site

Crucible

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 22, 2010 by ellocogringo

Crucible

p-Truth, n-Truth, m-Truth

In my quest to explain bottom up thinking, I had thought to coin the term p-Truth (pseudo). Alas I find it is a well developed concept. Simply put, it is a truth that could be possible, but is not proven. I had always known that my mind discards erroneous and irrelevant data. A bullshit detector, if you will. This is the n-Truth (non), a truth that is not possible. IE you know something that “ain’t so”. There is also the m-Truth (mini), a truth which fits in with and validates the p-truth.

“truth = appropriate logic + relevant data” – el Loco Gringo

(I can’t believe that people write whole books on the topic, it’s so simple)

“truth is simple and beautiful, deceit is devious and ugly” – el Loco Gringo

Without reading any of these books, (a concept that requires a book is, by definition, devious and ugly) I’ll include links if you’re so inclined.

Starting from the bottom, there is no “truth” (unless you’re God, itself a p-truth).

Consider the field of genetics, DNA control was a p-truth, epigenitics is the new p-truth. And as we learn, we will discover new p-truths. (Either by serendipity or applying bottom up logic).

Following this from my perspective, my ANN is a truth, your ANN is a p-Truth, psychology is an n-Truth. IE to me; the ANN is the way my mind works (I’ve been there), it is probably the way everyone’s mind works, psychology isn’t possible.

Also to me; the concept that the fabric of the universe is governed by vectors in the 4th dimension is a p-truth. Einsteins concept of the space-time continuum is an n-truth. (I could be right, he’s wrong)

Also, to me, yoga is a truth (works for me). Yoga, TA, whole brain, Zen, TM etc are p-truths for others (could be). This then is what I mean by “seek your own truth”, seek that which works for you. Heed that little voice peeping in the corner of the echo box that says “they’re all full of shit” (the Scientific Method is an n-truth)

Thus there is no TRUTH, there is only truth, a p-truth as determined by the right algorithm setting the point on the left algorithm. It may be “the best answer to date”, “this idea seems to work for the moment” or even the less definitive “could be”.  So maybe this is as good as it gets, to be a candle in the darkness.

Doorman

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 19, 2010 by ellocogringo

 

“We have two cognitive minds each with it’s own logical and perceptual processing, synchronous and modulated by intensity. (weighting)” – el Loco Gringo

Keeping Things Relevant

For those of you interested in  computers, the above model shows what I am talking about.  The ISR (interrupt service routine) is the doorman.  When the right mind makes a correlation between data inputs, it sets the (INT) interrupt flag (attention).  If the left mind can find the “best answer to date on the left algorithm, it goes with the shortcut.  1/2 second.  Else, it searches the left unANN (shortcut memory)  3 seconds. Then the right memory (inclusional memory) 3 seconds, Then the right algorithm 1/2 second.  If no hits are made it sets the IRQ (interrupt request) and evaluates the correlation found in the right mind.  And as with a computer the cache (short term memory) must be flushed periodically or the entire system will get hung up in a endless loop. (spinout)

Our mind only processes data as it relates to real life experience. In speaking with another person about any topic, it then becomes part of our real life experience and will be processed. Whereas before, my real life experience was trying to understand why people reject logic and facts, now my real life experience is the workings of the mind. It is being processed. My understanding this requires that I acquire a better visualization method. “make it so” . I am starting to see the mind in visual symbols, almost impossible to put into words. See if you can put this into words. Picture the unANN as an amorphous (un-ordered) liquid (sic) the ANN “poofs” it causing ripples (in 4 dimensions)

The Doorman

In a normal unblocked brain, each mind, (left binary, right Boolean) receives data simultaneously, and each goes through it’s own logic patterns. Results are compared via the corpus colostrum for hinky. (the bullshit detector) The wire to this bullshit detector has been cut in 80% of the population by imprinting, education, culture, religion and/or taboo on the right mind. The left mind is dominant unless hinky has been detected (within 8 seconds). (this input is not consistent with previous input) The enigmatic DrB and I were discussing various methods of bypassing blocks on the right mind to access it directly. (sideslip, yoga, I Ching, Whack me, Oblique strategies etc.) DrB mentioned a doctor that had been using the same technique and went on to describe it. I didn’t see the relevance. She pulled the paper out of the drawer and read the relevant passage. Yup, she’s exactly right, the guy was using visual images to access the right mind directly. She had omitted the part about visual images in the original accounting. I suspect that if I had recorded the original comments she would be amazed to discover that the central part of the concept, crucial to understanding what she was trying to convey, was omitted. This is the doorman. You have 8 seconds to get a right mind concept past the doorman and make it relevant to survival. (actually I suspect it’s 7 but 8 is the result of research) This is also what is happening with these “fleeting concepts”, you’ve got 8 seconds to nail it down and make it relevant so the left mind has to deal with it.

This goes to communication as well, if you can make a lot of sense in the first 8 seconds the remainder of a speech can be total bullshit and not be flagged as hinky. This is just a QD Fix on a mass scale. Any good sales pitch will be front loaded, start with a bumper sticker then baffle ‘em with bullshit. We have to keep reminding ourselves (every 8 seconds) to “listen for the new told lie”Hair

Hinky – Something as yet undefinable is wrong, out of place; not quite right.

What was I talking about? Oh well. maybe it’ll come to me later

 

Herding Cats

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , on June 18, 2010 by ellocogringo


Let’s cage them there cats

Hearding Cats

< voice a<—> voice b>

Need to get a lexicon for squishy concepts, else we’ll sound like Buddy Hacket and Ozzie Osbourne arguing string theory in Aramaic underwater. De-squishification if you will. starting with top down/bottom up Top down being a binary decision tree (A or B) and bottom up being a boolean tree (A or B or both or neither). Whatever terms you use the left mind is “good” and the right mind is “evil”, and the Great mysterious just is. This is NOT amerind which uses serial/parallel (pathfinder/inclusional) I’ll leave serial/parallel for later.

Top Down/Bottom Up

The yin/yang model is as close as I can come to my view with the caveat that yin/yang is inside the skull, IE our PERCEPTION of the world. in the occident right mind activity is viewed as the devil, satan, psychotic, metaphysical, heritical or just plain evil. depending on worldview. (tunnel) which I liken to a telescope with scale adjustmentwhich sets end points for processing by the left and right minds. The left mind is rational, the right mind is logical. (irrational)
Serial/Parallel

Here things get hinky. It would appear that ALL RELEVANT data gets correlated in the right mind and paths set on the left mind. This is quite different from the occidental worldview. It is as if the “telescope” is locked at full magnification. Or a wide angle lens, if you will. Not better, not worse, just different. Or, you could say the individuation is farther out. Less resonance? It’s real squishy here. (at least for me) While the inclusional perspective would seem rambling and incoherent to an occidental, the pathfinder mode seems easy to follow. Fascinating!

I’ve started another website dedicated to herding cats. Let’s put some lipstick on the felines.

Or………………….. we can run with the squirrls like mainstream physics.

The three legged stool

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , on June 17, 2010 by ellocogringo

Stool

Plato’s Mobile Centering 4

I have a logical dilema.  I know that we have two cognitive minds.  It is entirely possible with this model that nothing external to me exists, so that the entire universe is an elaborate hoax set up to trick me.  Somehow, that doesn’t sound reasonable.  In ref to secret 1 & 2,  I’m not happy with what he says, but it does say “it ain’t real” in terms an idiot can understand. in finding fault which I agree with, he speaks of electrical signals. if you’re going to think of it in those terms, the brain is chemical, the “signals” are the effect, not the cause. I was thinking of stripping the sound off, and overlaying my own or just strip the sound off period.

as to how the hell do we get from ourselves as inclusions in the universe to local objects with internal sensing and interpretation equipment?

aye, there’s the rub. In my model, which is truth to me and speculation to you, there are 3 things in play. right mind, left mind and reality. We have two ways of looking at the world. through the tunnel of mainstream physics electrons/space describes “what’s out there”. a totally inadequate view. It is our interpretation of our perception of the electron and the perception of space yields the normal dual interpretation that space is the aggregate and accumulate sum of the electrons. But this is only our perception of “what’s out there”. the same is true for every tunnel I’ve looked through. So……you could say that our perception of ourself in relation to our perception of society is not SOCIETY. IE it is inside the skull. A little disambiguation is in order. So anytime a “dual” view of anything is presented, I wonder where the other element is. If you say intrinsic/extrinsic for instance, It seems to me like a three legged stool with one leg missing. If you intend extrinsic to mean right mind (our perception of what’s out there)., that leaves unanswered “what’s out there?” (that’s where I’m at) If you intend it to mean “what’s out there” that causes me to wonder what happened to your right mind. Genetic defect, amputation, or idiot? for whatever reason it ain’t working. we have to be looking through a tunnel unless we can fit the universe inside the skull, in which case we can make up our own rules. as to “one mind”, this is speculation only, which i tend to agree with, leaves unanswered the question “what is the quantum mind?” I have two hits on the molecule. not inconsistent. If true, there is a tiny bit of mind in each molecule which in the aggregate would make up the “one mind” so they are the same. BUT the one mind and the quantum mind are only inside the skull merely being our perception of “what’s out there” looked at through the mind tunnel. at this scale we would be about half way between the quantum mind and the one mind. The mind analyzes “what’s out there” in two modes which would fully explain everything I have seen. In this case the endpoints set by the tunnel are artifacts, and MAY not reflect reality. whether the universe is infinite or not depends on this and the best we can hope for is “the universe is infinite, as far as we can tell” I don’t think this “one mind” gives a shit what this semi-mini mind thinks about it. The brain itself perceives and interprets in exactly the same way, with the output determined by worldview. why should intrinsic/extrinsic be any different? so we’re back to the yin/yang wars.

Or…. an alternative interpretation, I could be full of shit, I am crazy, don’t you know?

Bifurcated Fart

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 17, 2010 by ellocogringo

Stool

Again


This is an exchange between Mr Ted and myself  homing in on the nature of the thought process.  I am going to ignore the OPL because MrT’s essays do tend to be verbese.  It’s not glare, it’s just the way he thinks.  We’re herding cats here.

Gang of 3 (Mr Ted 07/17/10)

Found Here> http://goodshare.org/wp/gender-and-space-in-the-social-dynamic/

1. We can imagine dynamics to be one-sided and male (with space as a non-participant) in which case the individual is deemed fully responsible for the results of his actions which ‘play out in time’.  This ‘male’ view of dynamics is impossible in ‘reality’ but it is employed extensively in Western thinking.  We use it to establish ‘credit’ and ‘blame’ for emergent ‘results’.  This is the legacy of Aristotelian notion of ‘purpose’ (‘intrinsic final cause’) as in the ‘acorn-to-oak-tree’ dynamic where we conceive of the encoded knowledge and purpose encapsulated within the acorn, pushing out of itself (self-actualizing) to produce its final form in such a manner that it is deemed fully and solely responsible for this result.  This simplistic (“not that which is most true but that which is most easy”) view of dynamics is used as the foundation for ‘genetics’ and for ‘Darwin’s theory’ and dominates in western architecture/design of organization (government and commercial enterprise)..

2. We can imagine dynamics to be two-sided and androgynous (with space as a non-participant) so that there will always be ambiguity as to the respective ‘male’ and ‘female’ combination; i.e. the dynamic is assumed to be one dynamic of an androgynous character.  This understanding we use when we observe a tree moving in the wind or a flag flapping in the breeze.  There is no ‘time’ separation in this view, between the re-forming of the tree-boughs and the re-forming of the airflow, since the one is simultaneously reciprocal to the other.  This leads us to complexify our understanding of dynamics to the point of seeing dynamics as geometric transformation; e.g. if we start with a simple dynamic view where Lulu is leaving work and heading for the party, we have two entities; ‘Lulu’ and ‘the party’ which are converging.  But the party is not the same party that Lulu was moving towards when Lulu is included in it, and work is not the same ‘work’ when Lulu has been removed from it.  That is, movement of things can also be understood as the transformation of the relational geometry of space where intrusion (male) and accommodation (female) are flip sides of the same coin (the transformation of the geometry of space).  This is still ‘one step short’ of including space as a participant in dynamic phenomena.

3. We can understand dynamics in terms wherein space is a participant is characteristic of ‘flow’ as is the worldview in a Heraclitean philosophy; i.e. the male-assertive fountaining-forth is in conjugate relation with the here-receptive-there-resistive accommodating of the fluid medium.  There are not ‘two dynamics’ going on in this view, but one dynamic which we can interpret as two.  For example, within a community, there is generally a mixture of ‘pushy’ and ‘accommodating people.  The pushy ones tend to have an ‘ego’ that gives full credit to themselves for ‘the results’ that ‘they achieve’ and regards their accommodating brethren as ‘weak’ and ‘inferior performers’ as trees that are whipped about by the wind..  This is the ‘social Darwinist’ view that gives zero credit to the female accommodative aspect and sees all results as if they derived from male competition.  This is at the origin if the feminist complaint; ‘my grandfather was a famous engineer, my grandmother had no name’.  But the big step in ‘complexification’ of our view of dynamics (bringing our understanding closer still to the reality of our experience) is when we ‘let go’ of the notion of the persisting identity of ‘local objects’ and acknowledge that they are transient ‘forms’ that gather in the flow.  As Emerson says, all material objects are essentially like the cataract; i.e. there is a persisting form there even though it derives purely from flow.  Material objects that gather and are re-gathered in the flow are not only ‘inhabited’ by the dynamic of the flow-medium but are created by it.  The flow is a ‘holodynamic’ in which material objects are flow-forms that are continually being gathered and re-gathered.

Hi Mr Ted

BINGO!

Damn you’re getting good at this. I am reduced to contesting only one word in your summary of 3.

where you say

*3. We can understand dynamics in terms wherein space is a participant is characteristic of ‘flow’*

I would substitute imagine for understand.

This is entirely attributable to:

*3. The precedence of nonlocal over local

Caught you. I caged that cat. The aboriginal Brain Fart! (sorry about the graphic in this link, I couldn’t find a animated brain farting with a feather )  This is the “it is obvious that” which has no place (literally, no neurons) in bottom up/top down thinking (Aristotelean/Taoist Brain Fart.) This leads me to speculate on the bifurcated fart, IE sometime in pre-history The basic imprinting pattern changed from the ABF/TBF pattern which are two minds of the same brain to something different. Fascinating!

This is my take on the gang of 3 (occidental)

Consider “A centered’s thoughts are governed by his own truth, an idiot’s thoughts are governed by someone elses truth.” – el Loco Gringo (to Mr Geoff)

1.This is the stupidity you speak of. An idiot has no “me”. No inner voice that whispers “back off” when someone else tries to occupy “rent free space” in their mind. They become zombies, robots, hollow, golems pretending to be wise, clanking around in this meaningless ant warren of a society we inhabit. They are, in fact, without volition.

2. The centered, being pragmatic, understand and accept the ambiguity of the situation, pretending to be idiots, doing what ever it takes to survive but maintaining their individuation, however surreptitiously.

3.Then there are the nexialists, what Maslow called the transcendents. They understand and do not accept the ambiguity of the situation, and they’re going to do something about it. Their minds have not been hijacked.

This “difference” I attribute entirely to my having data you are not privy to IE we have two cognitive minds.

Overall, very, very impressive analysis, a sidereal view of the ABF/TBF brainfart. Far superior to Plato.

Wetware

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , on June 14, 2010 by ellocogringo

 

The Brain

A three pound amorphous mass of self-programming neurons controlled by wetware

Wetware is a reprogramable system that allows the mind to index data, memories, concepts and provides links to these. It also sets the decision points in the algorithms accordingly. Basically the ANN, plus the defense mechanisms, plus the algorithms. Consider a library in which all of the books were piled in a heap in the middle of the floor. It would be a pretty tough job to find an Ayn Rand book. The smaller the pile of books, the less time it will take to find it. Consider a telephone directory in which the names were entered in random order. How long would it take to find Ayn Rand? This is the way the pre-human mind works. Time is the (un considered) limiting factor in how big the brain can be. Enter wetware. We index the library. All of the books are put on shelves and to find a particular book all we have to do is look in the index to find that Rand, Ayn is in bookcase A, third row down and we can go right to it. We alphabetize the phone book and Rand, Ayn is near the beginning of the R’s, and we can go right to it. This is the way the human mind works. The mind no longer needs to remember the data, but only the index of where the data is stored.
Consider Charlie and Polly pre-human walking through the jungle. A boa falls out of a tree and wraps itself around polly and crushes her. The next time a similar occurance occurs (as occurances are wont to do) It will take 6 seconds for Charlie to recall the memory and then begin thinking about what to do. Not too good for Polly. Now if Charlie were human, ie had wetware, the first time this happened, he would review the situation later and decide that next time he would grab a rock and pound the thing in the head, eating lunch instead of being lunch. His ANN sets a trigger point on his algorithm, and within 1/2 second he grabs a rock and begins pounding the head of the boa. MUCH better. TIME, TIME, TIME It’s about time, It’s all about time, It’s always all about time
Starting at birth the baby has only the primal defense mechanism, set by epigenetics, to work with.  At birth the wetware programming starts.  It can be viewed as a neuron trellis, something to give neurons a path to follow.  During the critical period of imprinting, this wetware is accepted as truth.  Historically this imprinting has consisted of family and social mores, language, religion, (taboo) and more recently education (lattice).  After the critical period, estimated to be between 7 and puberty, begins the period of learning.  During  the learning any concepts that are inconsistent with the imprinting cannot be accepted and are regarded as heretical.  The Aristotelean Brain Fart is the most debilitating of the imprintings, being championed by both religion and education.  Simply put, people KNOW the earth is round but UNDERSTAND the earth as being flat.  This is the source of anomie.  The hole in the soul.  The search for meaning.


MRI’s

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , on June 13, 2010 by ellocogringo


“Brain imaging studies seem so simple and elegant: Hook someone up to a functional MRI (fMRI) machine, which measures blood flow; see which parts of the brain light up; and identify regions associated with love, rejection, etc. But in a forthcoming paper [pdf], psychologist Hal Pashler of the University of California at San Diego and his colleagues challenge the validity of broad claims that come from these studies. The authors charge that shoddy statistics and noisy measurements are leading to gross overestimations of the correlation between brain activity and emotions.” Pugnacious

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/apr/18-the-pugnacious-paper-that-aims-to-turn-neuroscience-on-its-head

The omniscient erudite and eloquent maharishi emeritus el Loco Gringo will break this down so you don’t have to read the entire report. There, wasn’t that easy? However, eLG is grudgingly forced to admit that even an idiot can come up with relevant data. This is a really good gif file that shows pathways. As to the problem, the brain is a chemical computer, so the electrical flashes they are seeing is the result, not the cause. IE, a side-effect of what’s happening. Also, It only shows the electrical activity at the axon (perception) level, which may be fairly accurate, but the activity at the dendrite (logic) level is questionable, which is what the paper is alluding to. I wonder if they’ve identified the “idiot center”?. Now that I’d be interested in. This is what Big Al was referring to “building accident upon accident”

Below: White matter fiber tracking derived from Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI). The paths of fibers passing through the corpus callosum were tracked. Red represents fibers running primarily left/right. Blue is up/down, and green is front/back.

http://bic.missouri.edu/images.html

I was thinking when reading Mr Sid’s Chemistry of love of what happens when the drugs wear off. Wake up at 3 AM look at your sleeping spouse and wonder “what was I thinking?”

Missouri ChemistryOfLove Pugnacious


Chrysalis

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , on June 13, 2010 by ellocogringo


Jilll Bolte Taylor

It is deeply rewarding to watch the transformation of Jill from a hollow person to a complete person. (However, I certainly do not recommend the method she used to achieve nirvana) To realize that there is a “we inside of me”. To recognize that “we are beings with two cognatative minds and manual dexterity”. To understand the intricity of her connectedness with the universe and maintain her individuation. To have the vision of “a world full of beautiful, loving, compassionate, caring people”.

While it is comforting to know that on other mountaintops such people exist, it is disheartening that there are so few, and these few are being hunted down and shot up with dopazine® or smartacide®. And they are desperately needed.

Stroke of insight Transcript Jills Home Page


 

Scientist

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , on June 13, 2010 by ellocogringo

Scientist, Engineer, Technician


 

 

 

One of the differences between the p-Zombie and the centered is that the p-Zombie has no choice. His actions, thoughts, concepts are limited by “someone else occupying rent free space in his mind”. This is about 90% of the population.

The centered, however, have choices. They can CHOOSE to operate on one of three planes.
The scientist, the “head in the clouds” idealist to whom all things are possible. Putting together seemingly disparate pieces of information to form new concepts.
The engineer, the generalist who can translate these concepts into actionable plans.
The technician, the specialist with the talent to implement these plans.

They can also choose to be an idiot or an asshole, but then they loose choice.

Notice I used the word plane and not level. Use of the word level would assume a hierarchy which doesn’t exist. Who am I to place a value judgment on how someone else chooses to achieve self fulfillment. That is their truth. The technician has chosen to achieve self fulfillment as a technician. That is HIS truth, that is his #1 level. I would just be an asshole if I were to attempt to quantify his decision by my values.
Interface

(Me, I, Self/Society)

As I mentioned, the individual consists of 3 personae:

I – left hemisphere, serial, literal, organized, in industrial parlance operates in the technician mode, ie the mind technician implements decisions. Locked and un-centered. Threatened by new concepts. 80% of population.

Type a; idiot

Type b; asshole

Me – combined, understands and interprets the Self for implementation by the I. Ie The mind engineer. Locked. Not threatened by new concepts. 20% of population.

Self – right hemisphere, creative, random inquisitive. The mind scientist. Unlocked and centered. Seeks out new concepts<1% of population.

Another way of looking at this is; if one assumes that mankind can be divided into smart and dumb, they would break out as follows;

smart people who know they’re smart <1% the mind scientist. Open.

smart people who think they’re dumb 10% the mind engineer. Centered.

dumb people who think they’re smart 10% the asshole. Closed.

dumb people who know they’re dumb 80% the mind technician. Centered


Maslow

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 13, 2010 by ellocogringo
ABRAHAM MASLOW
1908-1970
(Transcendent added)

Return to> the minds

Maslow had a lot going for him. It’s a pity his view on psychology didn’t prevail over the reductionists. (Same with Einstein, the ABF has sure got this society screwed up)  I would change his “hierarchy of needs” to “hierarchy of perceived needs.” It is not possible to consider the needs of the individual without considering the environment. The “shortcuts” must be valid. IE the top down and bottom up must be “not inconsistent” with relation to the environment (family, society etc). Psychology, in general, treats the individual as being in a vacuum. The source force of the problem, rather than a balance between the individual and society. This is a three way balancing act: top down, bottom up and social interface. Also: it is not generally recognized that psychology is very ethnocentric, individual and situational. There is no solid ground to stand on from the outside. To find solid ground, it is necessary to get in the persons skull, and observe the problem from his point of view. Find out where he/she’s coming from. “Rufus May” is right on in this respect.

Excerpts; Maslowian self-actualization If you have significant problems along your development — a period of extreme insecurity or hunger as a child, or the loss of a family member through death or divorce, or significant neglect or abuse — you may “fixate” on that set of needs for the rest of your life. – fixate” isn’t the right word. As pointed out in the “Asperta Supra” paper, epigenetics will come center stage to the arena of mental “health” – walt  http://cogprints.org/6658/1/mdis12a.pdf It isn’t surprising, then, the world being as difficult as it is, that only a small percentage of the world’s population is truly, predominantly, self-actualizing. Maslow at one point suggested only about two percent! These people were reality-centered, which means they could differentiate what is fake and dishonest from what is real and genuine. They were problem-centered, meaning they treated life’s difficulties as problems demanding solutions, not as personal troubles to be railed at or surrendered to. And they had a different perception of means and ends. They felt that the ends don’t necessarily justify the means, that the means could be ends themselves, and that the means — the journey — was often more important than the ends. The self-actualizers also had a different way of relating to others. First, they enjoyed solitude, and were comfortable being alone. And they enjoyed deeper personal relations with a few close friends and family members, rather than more shallow relationships with many people. They enjoyed autonomy, a relative independence from physical and social needs. And they resisted enculturation, that is, they were not susceptible to social pressure to be “well adjusted” or to “fit in” — they were, in fact, nonconformists in the best sense. They had an hostile sense of humor — preferring to joke at their own expense, or at the human condition, and never directing their humor at others. They had a quality he called acceptance of self and others, by which he meant that these people would be more likely to take you as you are than try to change you into what they thought you should be. This same acceptance applied to their attitudes towards themselves: If some quality of theirs wasn’t harmful, they let it be, even enjoying it as a personal quirk. On the other hand, they were often strongly motivated to change negative qualities in themselves that could be changed. Along with this comes spontaneity and simplicity: They preferred being themselves rather than being pretentious or artificial. In fact, for all their nonconformity, he found that they tended to be conventional on the surface, just where less self-actualizing nonconformists tend to be the most dramatic. Further, they had a sense of humility and respect towards others — something Maslow also called democratic values — meaning that they were open to ethnic and individual variety, even treasuring it. They had a quality Maslow called human kinship or Gemeinschaftsgefühl — social interest, compassion, humanity. And this was accompanied by a strong ethics, which was spiritual but seldom conventionally religious in nature. And these people had a certain freshness of appreciation, an ability to see things, even ordinary things, with wonder. Along with this comes their ability to be creative, inventive, and original. And, finally, these people tended to have more peak experiences than the average person. A peak experience is one that takes you out of yourself, that makes you feel very tiny, or very large, to some extent one with life or nature or God. It gives you a feeling of being a part of the infinite and the eternal. These experiences tend to leave their mark on a person, change them for the better, and many people actively seek them out. They are also called mystical experiences, and are an important part of many religious and philosophical traditions. Maslow hoped that his efforts at describing the self-actualizing person would eventually lead to a “periodic table” of the kinds of qualities, problems, pathologies, and even solutions characteristic of higher levels of human potential. Over time, he devoted increasing attention, not to his own theory, but to humanistic psychology and the human potentials movement. Toward the end of his life, he inaugurated what he called the fourth force in psychology: Freudian and other “depth” psychologies constituted the first force; Behaviorism was the second force; His own humanism, including the European existentialists, were the third force. The fourth force was the transpersonal psychologies which, taking their cue from Eastern philosophies, investigated such things as meditation, higher levels of consciousness, and even parapsychological phenomena. Perhaps the best known transpersonalist today is Ken Wilber, author of such books as The Atman Project and The History of Everything. We also have the example of a number of people who were creative in some fashion even while in concentration camps. Trachtenberg, for example, developed a new way of doing arithmetic in a camp. Viktor Frankl developed his approach to therapy while in a camp. There are many more examples. These are needs that do not involve balance or homeostasis. Once engaged, they continue to be felt. In fact, they are likely to become stronger as we “feed” them! They involve the continuous desire to fulfill potentials, to “be all that you can be.” They are a matter of becoming the most complete, the fullest, “you” — hence the term, self-actualization. Ken Wilber was born on January 31, 1949 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. In 1967, he enrolled as a pre-med student at Duke University,[2] and was almost immediately disillusioned with what science had to offer. He became inspired, like many of his generation, by Eastern literature, particularly the Tao Te Ching. He left Duke, enrolled in the University of Nebraska at Omaha, and completed a bachelor’s degree in chemistry and biology. In 1973, Wilber completed his first book, The Spectrum of Consciousness, in which he sought to integrate knowledge from disparate fields. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao_Te_Ching I like him already – walt What no one can see is that we are in a post renaissance mindset. We need a renaissance II ie check out the observations, validate with experiment and THEN formulate a theory. – TPL walt I’m afraid you have seriously underestimated the stupidity of man. I snapped to the weirdness of the space/time continuum concept in highschool. By the time I was 19 I figured out that matter was composed of waves. Most if not all, physicists know this. Yet they continue to try to fit reality into their preconceived notion of what reality is, coming up with ridiculous illogic like string theory, membrane theory, dudecohedron TOE etc. There has not been an advance in understanding the universe since pythagoras. I have been trying to communicate this for 40 years to no avail. I find that once I call someone an idiot all the ambiance gets sucked out of the room. (I’m kind of obnoxious by nature)Even big AL only used math to demonstrate how it worked. BUT THE MATH IS NOT THE PHYSICS. If the math and reality disagree, the math is wrong, not reality. Space and time are merely the shadows of reality spoken of in plato’s cave. The C component of E=MC^2 is wrong if there is no space or time. I ran into a non-idiot psychologist and am at present working on a paper concerning this from a different perspective. The real problem is getting it past the idiots. It is just so damn obvious I can’t see why a plumber can’t see it, much less a physicist. I’m afraid you have seriously underestimated the stupidity of man. I snapped to the weirdness of the space/time continuum concept in highschool. By the time I was 19 I figured out that matter was composed of waves. Most if not all, physicists know this. Yet they continue to try to fit reality into their preconceived notion of what reality is, coming up with ridiculous illogic like string theory, membrane theory, dudecohedron TOE etc. There has not been an advance in understanding the universe since pythagoras. I have been trying to communicate this for 40 years to no avail. I find that once I call someone an idiot all the love seems toget sucked out of the room. (I’m kind of obnoxious by nature)  Even big AL only used math to demonstrate how it worked. BUT THE MATH IS NOT THE PHYSICS. If the math and reality disagree, the math is wrong, not reality. Space and time are merely the shadows of reality spoken of in plato’s cave. The C component of E=MC^2 is wrong if there is no space or time. I ran into a non-idiot psychologist and am at present working on a paper concerning this from a different perspective. The real problem is getting it past the idiots. It is just so damn obvious I can’t see why a plumber can’t see it, much less a physicist. el Loco Gringo, Nexialist.

Putting it all together

el Loco Gringo, Nexialist.


I picture myself as a butterfly flitting between the artificially constructed baskets the ABF likes to put things in seeking wisdom. PTIB Re-integrating a differentiated reality.  Defining what it means to have an uncrippled mind.  Identifying the characteristics of the Transcendent.    The more astute of you will notice the om symbol on the upper right.  It is the hindu symbol chosen by SAND (Science And Non Duality) conference.  (non-duality = non-idiot)  Walking among mankind is a tiny group of people called, depending on world view, non-idiots, transcendents, inclusional, buddha mind, nexialists, centered, aware, super-gifted or Bipolar manic/depressive (BMD). But they are few, so very few, and these few are being hunted down and shot up with dopazine, impalled, de-tenured, burnt at the stake depending on milieu.  Heileighn estimates .047%  Thats 141,000 in the US and most of them are institutionalized, shot up with dopazine or smarticide.  They are 3d popups in a 2d world, able to see the “big picture” and understand that man cannot exist without the understanding that he is part of a whole.

They have an insight that is desperately needed.

Perhaps most important, however, they understand the glorious potential of man.

home

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Temporal Displacement

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 13, 2010 by ellocogringo

Temporal Displacement

disconnect from time

“You don’t really live longer if you give up your nasty habits. It just seems that way” – el Loco Gringo

As has been my experience the best understanding of a concept comes from people who depend upon understanding this concept for a living.

The following is from>Neural Psychology and game design. Excerpts

“Predictive closure is the capacity of the mind to suggest consistent completion of a mental model, filling information gaps with a reasonable inference based on learned information.

Temporal Displacement is the prediction of hypothetical situations, including the predicted point of view of another person. Damasio calls this the “extended consciousness”

Extended consciousness goes beyond the here and now of core consciousness, both backward and forward. The here and now is still there, but it is flanked by the(remembered) past, as much past as you may need to illuminate the now effectively, and just as importantly, it is flanked by the anticipated future.” (Note, there is only now. The past is memories only and the future is anticipations.)

Anticipated is the key word in the above. We do not really predict the future, we anticipate it based on past experience IE “the best answer to date” and musing to determine alternate “best answers to date”. Alternative pasts. Viewed from an evolutionary point of view it is more important that we are rather than that we are happy. Thus our emotions are heavily weighted to the negative. By that I mean it is more important that we avoid being eaten now so that we can enjoy the lesser pleasure of eating later. Or you could say that if we are eaten now, the future becomes moot.

The sound byte for evolution is “survival of the fittest”, and although there is some of that, It really has more to do with the non-survival on the unfit. If you and a companion are being chased by a lion, you don’t have to run faster than the lion, you only have to run faster than your companion. Thus evolution is really “survival of the fit enough”. Indeed if it really were “survival of the fittest” the species would go extinct. People think backwards.

This speaks to subjective time, the “will this never end” feeling you get when you listen to your mother-in-law’s description of her gall bladder operation. Bad is more important than good and so we are wired to pay closer attention, and we don’t like it. But people that didn’t lost the race.

It also speaks to the “indeterminate December”. Based on various past “best answers to date” my left hemisphere could not get closure. It had “lost the plot”. A top down thinking fail. My right hemisphere has reacquired the plot and anticipates a ETF default sometime around November (election time). A bottom up thinking rescue. I really hope for a bottom up thinking fail. An ETF default would be some bad shit. There are a lot of signs now that I look for them. If the price of gold suddenly shoots up to $1500+, toss the guns in the car and head to the woods. On the up side, I’m not getting those flags anymore. They were getting as annoying as pop-up ads. Somehow, that’s not reassuring.

There is only now, the past is memories and the future speculation” – el Loco Gringo

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

The Double Bind

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on June 12, 2010 by ellocogringo

The Minds

A double bind is a dilemma in communication in which an individual (or group) receives two or more conflicting messages, with one message negating the other. This creates a situation in which a successful response to one message results in a failed response to the other, so that the person will be automatically wrong regardless of response – Wikipedia

This is a logic fail, a boolean question being asked in binary terms.  Can’t be done.  I have two daughters who at the time were 8 and 10.  They asked me individually which was prettier.  I gave what I thought at the time was a politic answer.  one was cute, one was pretty.  WRONG.  The Aristotelean brain fart had kicked in.  To this date, at age 33 and 35 they still accuse me of not thinking of each as cute or pretty, as the case determined.  This is the same thing that is happening in they yin/yang wars.  The answer should have been yes or neither.   All I can do in this situation is tell them “you’ll have to fight that out among yourselves”.   What I did learn, however, was to go sideways in these situations.  For instance, to force bottom up thinking into a top down query.  For instance, when cutting cake or a candy bar, standard procedure was for one to cut and the other choose.  If they couldn’t agree on who went first, they flipped a coin.  I even put this in my will, after the coin flip, one picks, then the other.  Hopefully, this will prevent animosity.


So I have developed a method to deal with these binary questions posed in an A or B format.   Yes, No, Both or Neither work pretty well.  Like “I don’t want to interfere in your business but “(I’m going to interfere in your business)  I have learned to anticipate these questions.  As soon as I hear the “but” I interrupt “no you don’t!” showing them the palm of my hand for emphasis.  Or ignore it, or turn on my heel and walk away if I’m not interested.  Or answer a different question forcing them to either abandon this line of communication or rephrase the question.  (either way works for me)  When asked a political question for instance DO NOT answer in terms of republican, democrat, liberal or conservative.  Answer instead something like “I think quantum mechanics is metaphysical bullshit”.  You’ll get a “deer in the headlights” look for 7 seconds, and they’ll change the subject.  It also adds to my panache as “touched”.  Or when one is posed about god, I may answer “I don’t think she’s that big an asshole”.  I have learned to cherish these looks.  Misogny, or racism are frequent topics for these questions.

You have to recoginze that these questions are intentional communication blockers, don’t worry about offending them, they’ve just insulted your mind.   Only an idiot will pose a double bind question.  Just have to decide on which sideslip is right for you.Do not try this on mom.  You are dealing with a professional.  Just say “I’m sorry for whatever I’ve done” and let it go at that.  She’ll drop the golden hammer on you “I spent 17 hours in labor to bring you into the world and you treat me like this?”

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Verbal Vertigo

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , on June 10, 2010 by ellocogringo

Idiots

On communicating with idiots

Quotes are exclusionary. IE in the western mind, setting aside for the moment that most people are idiots and are quick to dismiss Poindexter, Plato, Newton, Einstein as metaphysical bullshit, none of these people has a “best answer to date”. Remember that the left algorithm (top down thinking) is primarily a data discarding mechanism (exclusionary). Using my terms, So, while you or I may say “Schrodinger was right about A, and Plato was right about B and Einstein was right about C, and newton was right about D, therefore ABCD are not inconsistent. (could be) the Aristotelean brain fart limits the possibilities to A or B or C or D. In practical terms, what this means is that if a non-idiot cannot fit ALL of a concept into his worldview, the entire concept is rejected. Speaking of Schrodinger’s “one mind” to me is probably valid, but he did not “work the logic both ways” and failed to address the issue of “quantum minds”. So while an idiot would reject schrodinger as metaphysical bullshit, a non-idiot (with ABF) would reject schrodinger as incomplete, So anytime you quote schrodinger (or anyone) you are giving the reader an excuse to reject your core concept. Remember also that the words you use to describe extrinsic/intrinsic (or local/spacial or top down/bottom up or yin/yang etc) define the tunnel you are looking through. Swapping tunnels in a discussion gives a top down thinker “verbal vertigo” “he was talking about physics, now he’s talking about geese, WTF?” .  Their thought processes are limited by either/or possibilities. While I understand that the thought processes are identical for describing hurricanes, or geese, or bikers or the big hoochie coochie, most people can’t make that connection (ABF). They can’t hold more than one concept in their minds at one time.   To a person with ABF it is akin to swapping horses mid gallop, possible but tedious. (and that’s for a non-idiot, to an idiot the horses would be going in opposite directions) The core concept may really be rather simple but explodes into double-reverse thinking, backwards thinking, ping pong thinking, ambiguities etc. when expressed in words suited only to a Cartesian view of the world.

Yup, some of einstein, some of nietzsche some of newton, some of schrodinger can weave a “best answer to date”.  (after all, that’s what I do, and you) And i would certainly not want to not give them credit, it would be dishonest.
In the body of the message they are distractions that idiots can’t handle. Perhaps footnotes, or credit at the end.  Or both?  Or something else like “newtons right about A and nietzshes right about B but grouped separately? (in fact that might make a good paper in itself) it’s the scatter i’m concerned with. top down thinkers can’t handle that.  Remember a top down thinker starts with a conclusion and rejects all data and logic that doesn’t support it, dismissing it as metaphysical or percentages or aberrant defugalties. They’re trying, for instance, to reconcile a messed up cosmology with a messed up quantum mechanics, each with grand theories backed up by math that “proves” their position.  The scientific method doesn’t prove anything, it can only disprove. They think that calculus “proves” their views if they can put enough kludges in it, leaving the kludges for someone else to resolve.  they end up building their view with “accident upon accident” until they end up with a byzantine labyrinth of illogic that only a lunatic can understand. They don’t even realize that they’re asking the wrong question That’s why i call them idiots. Using top down thinking for inquiry borders on insanity. Look at the word irrational, for instance, it means, literally, not subject to ratios, but the ABF has left it with the urban meaning of illogical.  I think you are seriously underestimating the stupidity of the people you’re dealing with, quite intelligent but stupid nonetheless.

Pitfall

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 10, 2010 by ellocogringo

Return to the minds

Anti-Retrograde de-squishifying


What? Has eLG fallen off the cliff again?  What does an outdated Kiddie game with poor graphics have to do with physics, (or anything for that matter)?  Stay with me here folks,  I am trying to get a very simple concept into what is evidently very little minds.  If you don’t read anything else I have to say, read this.  This is Outside of the skull is the universe, it is of a wave nature.  All physicists know this but few physists understand it since Plato. This is not metaphysical bullshit but an attempt at an explanation for how we confuse out perception of reality for reality and how it affects our thinking.  Plato called outside the skull the ether, I call it the big hoochie koochie so as not to be confused what idiot philosophers and physicists mis-interpret as what he was saying.  Please pay attention folks, see if you can get a few of those neurons to synchronize and bypass that imprint you got in school.

Pitfall  Harry

(Atari 2600)
Picture this! You are deep in the recesses of a forbidden jungle – an unforgiving place few explorers ever survive. But you’ve got courage, because you’re with Pitfall Harry, the world famous jungle explorer and fortune hunter extraordinaire. the lure of hidden treasures draws you and Harry deeper and deeper into the bush…
–From the Atari 2600 Pitfall instruction manual.

Pitfall Harry is out for treasure in the jungle. Swing from vines, jump rolling logs, and hop from crocodile head to crocodile head in the search of treasure.  But, above all, avoid falling into the pits.

Of course it is.  Pitfall Harry ain’t real.  The point I am trying to make is that mainstream physics is also bullshit.  I am desperately trying to communicate something important to what are evidently idiots.  How the Ariestotelian Brain Fart has screwed up your thinking.  Maybe you will be amused by the pretty pictures and stay with me.

I am going to draw a line of skulls, the universe is on this side of this line and you are on the other side ,

Try not to fall into the pit like pitfall Harry.  Try to make that intuitive leap.  Avoid the verbal vertigo, the Aristotelian Brain Fart.  Understand that you are dealing with shadows, a  duality of reality.  You have fallen down the rabbit hole into wonderland.

So we go to the concert hall to listen to The London symphany play Hava Nagela.   Someone plunks his magic twanger and and that foxy gal in the blue gown toots her flute.  The BIG HOOCHIE KOOCHIE does an “unfolding in the now” .  At this point we leave reality and go inside the skull.

Enter the world of inside the skull

Understand that this is a 2d representation of a 3d interpretation of a 4d perception of reality (it’s squishy)

This “unfolding in the now” is perceived in the right mind as a rotating vector in the frequency domain. (the little hoochie koochie) I call this perception.  The doorman approves this perception (we did, after all, pay for the ticket so it is relevant)  and the left mind interprets this perception in the time domain as a note.  (one dimension is discarded and color, time and sound is added)  ToTO pulls back the curtain to reveal reality

Simultaniously the pattern in the right mind is evaluated as to relevancy by a parallel/boolean network with possible outputs of yes, no, both, or neither yielding correlations to stored patterns.  The results of this 4d process (in this case yes) is  presented to the left mind for where it is interpreted with a serial/binary process (in this case also yes). The algorithms compare.   “Aha!” says the left mind, “someone in the band just plunked his magic twanger.”  Now we’ll go back outside the skull on the output side.

“Aha!” says the ANN (esentially; the overseer, the you the ego the self the “i think therefore I am” of descartes fame) “you know, if we represented the note as a rotating wheel and stretched it out on an amplitude/time x/y graph, we could invent trigonometry”

So Newton gets hold of this and invents calculus. But as Mr Ted points out “once you re-integrate the differentiated reality you are left with a whole that is less than WHOLE”  Newton sees this but just attributes it to “God moves in a mysterious way

Now here come the Physicists.  Maintaing this cult of ignorance the assume the uneverse is particle in nature and attribute the discrepancies Newton observed to percentages, probabilities, quantum, theory, parallel universes etc.  Newton’s was better, at least he only had one unknown. Modern physics has built up a byzantine labrinith of illogic that only a psychotic can understand, piling error upon error.j  This is the logic error that was resolved by the Renaissance, during which people quit dissecting the concepts of others, and actually began doing experiments to determine what was actually happening.  We need a Renaissance II.  People need to start thinking for themselves.   So when we get down to the real nitty gritty we discover that Physics is bullshit.  It’s OK if you want to build a bridge but sucks if you want to discover the nature of the universe.  Physicists are not scientists, they are engineers pretending to be scientists.    Khaos reveals chaos theory.  and for you, Mr. Ted, the universe is infinite (from our perspective) as the earth is flat (from our perspective) and you can’t use flat tools to explore either.  You’re using a rubber ruler.

So many words for such a simple concept.  

“Truth is simple and beautiful, deceipt is devious and ugly” – el Loco Gringo

Is that really that difficult to understand?

keeper

Cup of Stupid

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , on June 7, 2010 by ellocogringo

I have on occasion drunk from the cup of stupid, and it has always given me a hangover, so I feel I can speak on the subject with authority. The hangover , however, does remind me to try not to do it again. I read through your comments on the link you sent. I’m impressed. I’m reminded of what Ayn Rand had to say on the subject. “No matter how impeccable the logic, how irrefutable the facts, how eloquent the words, you know in your heart that it can’t hear you, not in any way, for there is no mind there”. It’s like talking to a coffee table. I have spent a lifetime trying to figure out why stupid people do stupid things for stupid reasons and have come to the conclusion that “Stupid is forever, you can’t fix stupid.” Fully 80% of the population is in a state of perpetual stupidity. And it indeed is depressing to know that we live in a world where truth is irrelevant. On the up side I would like to direct your attention to the other 20%, those I call centered.

“The centered, being pragmatic, understand and accept the ambiguity of the situation, pretending to be idiots, doing what ever it takes to survive but maintaining their individuation, however surreptitiously. “

These are the people who keep the situation from spinning totally out of control. I submit that these are probably the bulk of the visitors to your site, not so much because of the logic, the facts or the words, but because what you have to say has worth. Even though I prefer to leave physics and math to “those interested in such things”, I still find much of worth on your site.

The centered have some interesting characteristics.


*They are not threatened by new ideas. They will “honestly” evaluate a new concept applying appropriate logic to relevant facts.

*They have a sense of connectedness, a compassion for mankind not normal in the general population.

*They are cross disciplinary. IE a centered poet is fully capable of understanding the concept of a cosmic standing wave, and the importance of it without the need to go into physics or math.

*They have an influence far out of proportion to their numbers. They are the “cooler heads that prevail” in decision making.


*They have a sense of social responsibility. They understand that as “a rising tide raises all ships, a sinking ship drowns passengers and crew alike”. They can balance the needs of the individual with the needs of society.

*They are complete and unique, in and by themselves, without the need for approval or validation.

*They are capable of dealing with a concept on anther’s terms. For instance, on reading your website, they can see the concept from your perspective.

There are more, but that’s enough. Essentially, they are non-idiots.

Now to TED. It is an invitation only group of thinkers whose only qualification seems to be that they invite only non-idiots. I have yet to find an idiot presentation on TED. For instance, I went on TED and did a search on “physics”. I picked the first and watched it. He has much of worth to say.   Our_place_in_the_cosmos

Never let it be said that my mind is inflexible. I have considered your comments on allowing my feelings to enter my writing. Accordingly, I have toned down my latest post.


Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Core Concepts 1

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , on June 7, 2010 by ellocogringo

Lexicon of the Psyche

(de-squishification)

Return to the minds

equates to

> subset of

<=> equivalent to

Outside the skull (input)

Great Mysterious ether, Big Hoochie Koochie, Cosmic standing wave, spacial sourcing primary?

Brain fart interface perceptual

Inside the skull >bHK

Perceptual

Right mind mythos, feminine, (time domain, vectors, tensors),[differentating] secondary?
Taoist brain fart [integrating]

Left Mind sound, time, color, motion (artifacts)

Logical > perceptual

Primary defense mechanism (bypasses algorithms)

Right mind logos, parallel, bottom up, constructionist, boolean

Left mind shortcuts, serial, top down, reductionist pathfinder? > tertiary?
Aristotelean brain fart [differentaiting]

Outside the skull (output)

Right mind art, music,

Left mind calculus>trigonometry>math>dimensioning (3rd, 4th,5th etc ‘iary etc)

This is the framework I have to fit every concept into. Because of imprinting I cannot conceptualize anything that I cannot fit into this framework. (the neurons no longer exist) In spite of it’s obvious limitations this framework is much more inclusive than most peoples. This is how my mind works. Each persons framework is unique (except for idiots who only have dogma to work with) The question in my mind is how many “free” neurons a person has left to accept “new” concepts. “use ’em or loose ’em”.  Although the brain looses 2/3 of it’s neruons, there is plenty of redundancy so that is not a factor. So whatever logic a person uses to get the “best answer to date” is right. The output of MY logic tree is “it ain’t real”

So in my view, the core belief “man belongs to earth, earth doesn’t belong to man” is tertiary, not secondary.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Dot2Dot

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , on June 6, 2010 by ellocogringo

Dot to Dot

Putting god into top down and bottom up logic trees.

Back to the mind


We have two cognitive minds each with it’s own logical and perceptual processing, synchronous and modulated by intensity. (weighting)” – eLG

Let’s take perceptual. The universe is of a wave nature with a beat of eight and is negentropic. But this is outside the skull. We’ll call this the BIG HOOCHIE KOOCHIE (reality). This is perceived inside the skull by the right mind as big-hoochie-koochie. (frequency domain, vectors) which is in turn interpreted by the left mind (time domain, sound, color, time) but the big hoochie koochie is not the BIG HOOCHIE KOOCHIE only our perception of it. Time, sound and color do not, in fact, exist outside the skull. Handled by the axion network.  The tunnel we view the world through sets endpoints which I call little-hoochie-koochies.  but these are not the LITTLE HOOCHIES, but only our interpretation of them. “unfolding in the now” or “whorls with whorls”

Now lets take logical. Outside the skull is TRUTH, inside the skull is truth. (our perception of the TRUTH) Handled by the dendrite network. Enhanced and limited by the world view (imprinting) and what we learn that is not inconsistent with the world view.

Let’s go to a neutral corner and consider the tao world view for instance. Yin is the right minds perception of the universe. (female, finesse) Yang is the left mind’s perception of the universe (male, power). However yin and yang are entirely inside the skull. In reality this duality does not exist in the universe, the universe just is. Yin and yang are just two ways of looking at the universe. Right mind, left mind. Keep in mind that when the neuron fires, both the axon and the dendrite network are triggered. Keeping the processing in sync. Modulated by the reticulator.

This is how the mind works. Always. The logic is exactly the same in a hardware sense but the wetware can change depending on culture, society, environment etc. The process with which concepts are processed is identical, but the wetware can yield a different result.

Now we’ll come out of the neutral corner and zoom in on the process. Try to get a sidereal view of what’s happening. Let’s say there is a god. Outside the skull is GOD, inside the skull GOD is perceived as god (right mind) and interpreted as religion (left mind). But god is not GOD, only our perception of GOD. Religious imprinting has shut down our perception of god and replaced it with our interpretation of god (IE religion) Thus we have lost the “wonder” of the glory of GOD and are left with only a sterile interpretation of god. god is the inner child, the mother earth which has been suppressed by de-feminization of religion. Thus the concept of religion must fit within the framework of god, not the other way around. God is not obligated to adhere to the precepts of religion. The reverse IS true. In our western society the preacher is dictating the rules GOD must adhere to. Can’t anybody else see how insane this is? So yes, DrB, religion killed god (but not GOD) We no longer are aware of our integral place in the universe. This is the “hole in the soul”. Do not interpret what I am saying as an indictment of religion. Religion is fine as long as it is understood that it is a sub-set of God.

Do not turn your back on someone who says he understands god.  He is a professional idiot.

So our perception of the universe says more about how the mind works than how the universe works. ANY bipolar philosophy is only a projection of our bipolar view of the universe onto the universe, whereas in fact this bi-polarity does not exist. The universe/GOD/big hoochie koochie/spacial forcing just is, and doesn’t really care about what weird interpretations we make of her. Top down/bottom up, yin/yang, awareness/analysis, constructionist/reductionist, mother earth/father eagle are concepts and concepts only, and the world is not the concept.

Patterns (perceptions) form in the right mind in response to the external environment and are interpreted by the left mind. The logic (dendrite) and perceptual (axion) patterns are synced when the neurons fire. The intensity of these patterns is determined by the reticulator. The nature of these patterns is determined by the worldview (imprinting + learning) which can enhance or inhibit the patterns. The same pattern can be interpreted as tao, connectedness, god, nirvana, centering, insight depending on the worldview.  So, the left mind IS yang, the right mind IS yin.

In no case should these concepts be confused with reality. IE god is not GOD, connectedness is not the UNIVERSE etc. but only our interpretations of them. This is the brain fart, confusing our perception for reality. I would hope no one would claim they can experience god or the universe in it’s entirety. In the occident the awareness of GOD (god) has been supplanted by religion and the awareness of the UNIVERSE (connectedness) by education. god, Tao, nirvana and the connectedness (with the universe) are the same thing, just different worldviews, a neuron trellis.  The difference is conceptual only.  And just what are YOU praying to?  GOD, god, science or religion?  Ya gotta believe in something, just understand what it is.

It would seem that god is female. GOD? Dunno OPL walt

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Great Mysterious

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , on June 5, 2010 by ellocogringo

Hi Mr Ted,  07/05/10

Sorry to be late getting back but you asked a big question here.  I had to wait till I could get the answer on one page.  (i don’t sit down and start writing with the intent of a one page limit, it is a goal i set for my bottom up thinking (eLG) which flags me when finished.  “time to answer Mr Ted”)  Your parallel is faster than my bottom up, my top down is crisper than your serial.
Anyhow, I’ll use the terms big and little hoochie koochie to label what’s “in here”.  and “the “great mysterious” to label what’s “out there”.  My view is;
Outside the skull is the great mysterious (GM) unknowable (unless you can fit it inside your skull) I  use the terms “BIG & LITTLE KOOCHIES”  to describe the great mysterious.  BHK is the sum of all the LHK’s  (if it’s finite, which concept i’m not sure even applies.)
Inside the skull we have to look outside through tunnels, which establish endpoints. (possibly turning the infinite into finite) and all we have to work with are our perceptions (bhk & lhk) and interpretations (top down, bottom up) so right off the get go we’re dealing with a sub-set of the GM and have to include a kludge “the GM  is the sum of all the lhk’s PLUS whatever it is we can’t perceive.”  So we interpret (top down) this subset bottom up perception  with our top down logic and say “the universe has a wave nature, is negentropic and is rotational with an octave characteristic, (maybe).  (kludge).  the more we zoom in through this tunnel, the more constricted the end points become and the further from reality we get.  so we are left with saying things like “society is the sum of all the individuals plus all the other things that affect society.” (which is everything, a kludge)
This then is the yin/yang wars, the battle of the hemispheres, the clash of algorithms, the local forcing/spacial forcing imbroglio which is rendered semi-moot because we’re not talking about reality but only our perception of it, truth being elevated to TRUTH.
We don’t know how accurate this perception is.
There is no TRUTH, there are only truths.
It’s all inside the skull.
It ain’t real
eLG did good    OPL walt

“The enemy you seek to defeat is the law of causality: it permits you no miracles.” – Ayn Rand

Einstein challenges this world-view that keeps layering accident upon accident, in a campaign to bore the human heart out of its natural wonder.  Notice the universe


Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Inside the skull

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 5, 2010 by ellocogringo

OK.  So lets say that the top graphic illustrates what’s outside the skull.  Call it the big hoochie koochie, GOD, Nirvana, cosmic standing wave, universe, one mind, TAO.  It doesn’t matter, they all are the same thing. Now we go inside the skull where what is perceived is called god. (but not GOD) or yin (but not TAO)

Inside the skull, in the right mind our perception of TAO forms the tao pattern.  This identical pattern is referred to as  nirvana, god, little hoochie koochie, cosmic standing wave, space time continuum etc.  depending entirely on world view.  The Taoist brain fart confuses this for reality. This happens at the axon level in the frequency domain.  This IS yin.

Inside the skull in the left mind the output of the right mind is interpretated in the time domain as sound, time, color, touch etc. also handled at the axon level.  The Aristotilean brain fart confuses this for reality.  This IS yang.  Please note, we are not even up to thinking yet.

Still inside the skull, the right mind evaluates the perception received in the right mind at the dendrite level with a weighted boolean/parallel network with outputs of A or B or Both but not neither.  This IS what the right mind thinks about yin.  This output is available to the left mind which determines the relevancy to dealing with the world.  (in the west) using a binary/serial process.  It MAY, depending on input, tunnel and world view, come up with something like this, or this.  This IS what the left mind thinks about yin  (yang).  The results of the left and right mind outputs are compared for inconsistencies, and if none exist The concept is accepted as valid.  (Feng Shui) Else the bullshit detector goes off. (feng shui fail, or feng shui fooie, or Oops!)

The weighting (importance) of the overall output is determined by the aggregate and accumulate output of the reticulator. This can be easily envisioned with the analogy of Charlie Chimp pondering whether to bonk Polly Protohuman.  What must be considered “The last time I bonked her how many times did the alpha male hit me and how hard”. Or in medeival times “How many people have been burned at the stake for saying the earth revolved around the sun”  or in modern times “How many people have been de-tenured when they spoke of the wave nature of the universe?”

So we are speaking of a biased subset of an evaluation of an interpretation of a perception of reality.  Kinda squishy huh?

Note, this is how it is supposed to work and assumes the brain hasn’t been hijacked by ideology.

Back outside the skull on the output side.  So now we come to this, a 2d representation of a 3d interpretation of a 4d perception of reality.  It ain’t real it’s a friggin piece of paper.  You can’t get back to TAO you may not even be able to get back to yin. Once you re-integrate the differentiated reality you end up with a whole that is less than WHOLE.  Quarks, parallel universes, dark matter etc are kludges to make the equations balance.  It’s mental masturbation. It’s trying to determine the nature of the universe by going over the programming code.  

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

ride on the wild side

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 4, 2010 by ellocogringo
A ride on the wild side
It is this “My way or highway” attitude in mainstream physics that prevents an understanding of the nature of the universe. There are some things happening inside the skull that affect the understanding. Your interest is outside the skull. Good, I prefer to leave physics and math to people who are interested in such things. Simply put, there is an unseen and unconsidered interface inside the skull which effects thinking. Consider Plato’s TOE. His logic is impeccable but his data is incomplete. He extrapolates his TOE from the 5 platonic solids. Grab the saddle horn here, your mind’s going to start bucking. My interest and question is WHY has he omitted the most basic and fundamental of the solids, the sphere. My interest is why are so many people stupid? His mind rejected the most obvious of all the solids. As for me, I can’t understand why everyone can’t see the vibrational nature of the universe. It is so obvious. Why does 99+% of physicists say they know the universe is vibrational in nature (or waves or compaction, or reflections (whatever, the word is not the concept) but they don’t act like it. Why are they so stupid, intelligent maybe, but stupid none the less. WHY, WHY, WHY? They continue to play silly mind games with the two slot experiment, the measurement problem, (what I call the whereness and whenness of the electron) the decay problem etc. My interest is not in the nature of the universe, per se, but WHY ISN’T IT OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE, not just physicists? Try to brush the crazy aside, I have the fear that if I start talking like an idiot, I’ll start thinking like one. (maybe stupid’s catching) ALL conventional wisdom is WRONG. (only dead fish go with the flow) People think backwards. Saddle up and let’s ride off into epiphany valley. My brain is trapped inside my skull, the only input being through imperfect and filtered senses. Something out there is doing the shimmy-shake. I call it the big hoochie-koochie there’s a visualization link below. Be sure to play the accompaning audio to catch the harmonics. So these vibrations come into my right mind and are perceived as rotating vectors. This is not reality, this is only a perception. This is what an animal perceives. There is no time, no color, no sound, just the rotating vectors. Actions are based not on discrete data, but on patterns in the vibrations. This is a weighted boolean network. Very complicated and cumbersome. The left mind reaches into this chaos (in both senses of the word), throws away a dimension and begins collating, matching, organizing etc. so as to present it in a form more useful in the decision making process (unless, of course, you’re trying to figure out the nature of the universe) This is a binary network This is an interpretation. OK, lets tie up here for a moment and think this through. Let’s make it simple. The big hootchie-koochie is doing something out there that that is perceived as a single rotating vector by the right mind. The left mind interprets this as a harmonic tone, as we add vectors to the perception we find that this tone has a beat of 8. (do, re, me, so, fa, la, ti, do) ie recursive, with an element of 8. (I’m not sure I’m using the right words, the words don’t exist, try to stick with the concept. “the word is not the concept”) Now lets take the results of this interpretation back outside the skull. An idiot physicist starts plotting the output data against an artificial domain called time on a piece of paper. This makes a sine wave. He then uses this sine wave to figure out what the big hoochie-koochie is doing. But it ain’t real. It’s just a friggin’ piece of paper. But he thinks it’s real. Time to get the horses back to the corral and rub them down. We’ve been riding them pretty hard and they’re getting sweaty. (one page limit)
Big hoochie koochie

A ride on the wild side
It is this “My way or highway” attitude in mainstream physics that prevents an understanding of the nature of the universe. There are some things happening inside the skull that affect the understanding. Your interest is outside the skull. Good, I prefer to leave physics and math to people who are interested in such things. Simply put, there is an unseen and unconsidered interface inside the skull which effects thinking. Consider Plato’s TOE. His logic is impeccable but his data is incomplete. He extrapolates his TOE from the 5 platonic solids. Grab the saddle horn here, your mind’s going to start bucking. My interest and question is WHY has he omitted the most basic and fundamental of the solids, the sphere. My interest is why are so many people stupid? His mind rejected the most obvious of all the solids. As for me, I can’t understand why everyone can’t see the vibrational nature of the universe. It is so obvious. Why does 99+% of physicists say they know the universe is vibrational in nature (or waves or compaction, or reflections (whatever, the word is not the concept) but they don’t act like it. Why are they so stupid, intelligent maybe, but stupid none the less. WHY, WHY, WHY? They continue to play silly mind games with the two slot experiment, the measurement problem, (what I call the whereness and whenness of the electron) the decay problem etc. My interest is not in the nature of the universe, per se, but WHY ISN’T IT OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE, not just physicists? Try to brush the crazy aside, I have the fear that if I start talking like an idiot, I’ll start thinking like one. (maybe stupid’s catching) ALL conventional wisdom is WRONG. (only dead fish go with the flow) People think backwards. Saddle up and let’s ride off into epiphany valley. My brain is trapped inside my skull, the only input being through imperfect and filtered senses. Something out there is doing the shimmy-shake. I call it the big hoochie-koochie there’s a visualization link below. Be sure to play the accompaning audio to catch the harmonics. So these vibrations come into my right mind and are perceived as rotating vectors. This is not reality, this is only a perception. This is what an animal perceives. There is no time, no color, no sound, just the rotating vectors. Actions are based not on discrete data, but on patterns in the vibrations. This is a weighted boolean network. Very complicated and cumbersome. The left mind reaches into this chaos (in both senses of the word), throws away a dimension and begins collating, matching, organizing etc. so as to present it in a form more useful in the decision making process (unless, of course, you’re trying to figure out the nature of the universe) This is a binary network This is an interpretation. OK, lets tie up here for a moment and think this through. Let’s make it simple. The big hootchie-koochie is doing something out there that that is perceived as a single rotating vector by the right mind. The left mind interprets this as a harmonic tone, as we add vectors to the perception we find that this tone has a beat of 8. (do, re, me, so, fa, la, ti, do) ie recursive, with an element of 8. (I’m not sure I’m using the right words, the words don’t exist, try to stick with the concept. “the word is not the concept”) Now lets take the results of this interpretation back outside the skull. An idiot physicist starts plotting the output data against an artificial domain called time on a piece of paper. This makes a sine wave. He then uses this sine wave to figure out what the big hoochie-koochie is doing. But it ain’t real. It’s just a friggin’ piece of paper. But he thinks it’s real. Time to get the horses back to the corral and rub them down. We’ve been riding them pretty hard and they’re getting sweaty. OPL

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

QD Fix

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 4, 2010 by ellocogringo

The QD Fix

Return to the minds

I hurt, heal me

This is something that has puzzled me for a long time. A perfect stranger will approach me with an appeal. The bizarre aspect of this is that they are leaving themselves emotionally naked before me, very vulnerable. I think what is happening is that their defense mechanism has broken down, and they can sense in me something that they want. Body language maybe giving me away? When the topic comes up, everyone I have spoken to who is centered has experienced the same thing. Of course, I’m dealing with a loaded data base, I only talk to centered people. I hope this doesn’t happen with idiots and assholes. They’ll fill their mind with crap.

Something seems to come up from inside me, I ask a few questions shake my beads and rattles and they seem satisfied. I think what is happening is my ANN can understand what is happening, (that’s what it does now, isn’t it) and takes over, communicating directly through me with the other ANN. This is getting real metaphysical, but it happens nonetheless and it works. Somehow the right words just seem to come out. Someday I may look into it. But the ANN can. Possibly their defense mechanism has been ripped out and they are temporarily centered and don’t remember how to think for themselves. Being centered they can read me, and sense the center. Then, I hurt, heal me. They expect my TRUTH, what they get instead is their truth. They want my center, instead they get their center. You’ve got them out, keep them out, reclaim your mind. Be who you’re supposed to be, not who someone else wants you to be.

Never surrender your mind

Never

The Quick and Dirty Fix

A time proven method for influencing attitudes. Traditional Used for thousands of years for “begonning demons”, It works as well today as it ever has. Modern

I guess I need to explain what I mean by sideslip. It’s going sideways logically. Humor is a sideslip, for instance. There are two logic trees, bottom up and top down. The left mind organizes what is in the right mind. So you’re tricking the mind. (I was thinking top down and I should have been thinking bottom up) “If God hadn’t wanted us to masturbate, she’d have given us shorter arms” for instance, a concept the person is not likely to have considered. or “time flies like an arrow, love flies like a sparrow, fruit flies like a banana” So you’ve got 1/2 second left algorithm, 3 seconds left mind, 3 seconds right mind then 1/2 second right algorithm. This gives 7 seconds to plant a meme. A hook (suggestion) will put them in a receptive frame of mind. (right) The mind is not multitasking so the “clock” is turned off during this period and all input saved in short term memory. The mind is busy processing the sideslip, and when finish slides the short term memory back in and restarts the clock, giving an illusory sense of continuity. This bypasses the decision tree and is treated as TRUE. Spooky shit really. To work the environment must be safe. The person is non-volitional during this period.

“Do not allow someone to occupy rent free space in your mind”

Warning; Choose your words carefully when performing a QD Fix. Consider the following scenario. Three women are awaiting execution by firing squad in some central American country. All three can see the wall. The first is led out placed against the wall READY, AIM, FLOOD shouts the first. While the squad panics seeking high ground, the first scampers over the wall and escapes. The second is led out placed against the wall READY, AIM TORNADO shouts the second. The squad scampers for the cellars and the second scampers over the wall and escapes. AHA!!! thinks the third, I see what they’re doing, they are triggering the fight/flight reflex which gives them 3 to 6 seconds to escape. Confident in her new found wisdom the third is led to the wall.

Basically the QD Fix is a three step process. Setup, Insert, Backout. Going sideways gives a 3 1/2 to 6 second window of opportunity to insert. the meme. Basically you tell him what you’re going to tell him (setup), tell him (Insert), and tell him what you told him. The meme should be easy, it’s just a compressed version of what you’ve been hammering away at his defense mechanism. The sideslip should be outrageous but non-threatening. It should be something which the patient could not possible have encountered before so that he has to abandon his algorithm while at the same time maintaining the continuity of the discussion. Keep in mind that the mind is not multi-tasking. It cannot think AND maintain the defense mechanism at the same time. So when he opens after you go sideways any incoming data goes into short term memory. It will be processed when he closes and spliced into his memory of events so he doesn’t see any discontinuity.

So off we go. I’ll use the invasion sideslip as an example. (This method is contra-indicated if the patient’s problem is that he sees monsters jumping out at him from behind the furniture, remember the firing squad). All people have a personal territory. For Americans and English it is 32 inches, for Europeans it is 28 inches. If you watch an Englishman and a German having a conversation, the German will back the Englishman up against the wall. Do not get too close or it will be perceived as a threat. Rapidly invade his space maintaining full eye contact. Wait 1/2 second and start talking. If his pupils dialate, bingo, you’re in. Once you’ve inserted the meme (3 seconds), backout,resume a relaxed posture and tell him what you told him. Maintain a continuous flow, if he responds pull, don’t push. “use phrases like “Yeah, I can see why you feel like that”, “Yup, been there myself”, “That must have been horrible, what did you do?” Resist the temptation to re-enforce your meme. (short version, when he starts talking, shut up and listen). He is correlating the new data with HIS previous conceptions to see how to incorporate it into a possible change in HIS defense mechanism. Do not correct him, he is exploring ALL possibilities. If a response is called for pull. Do not interrupt this correlation process. He’ll let you know when he’s finished. If he has any lingering issues, he’ll ask. It’s actually much simpler than it looks.

Oddly I found the below video on YouTube demonstrating the QD Fix. He’s not very subtle, but he’s effective. Notice the hook (head chest wrist) at the beginning. He uses a slap for the sideslip. Also notice the ticket agent checking left hemisphere (3 seconds) then right hemisphere (3 seconds). If you could see her pupils you would see they are dilated during this 6 second period (she’s non-volitional). After the six second search is complete, her mind will splice in the input data giving a non-interrupted memory. It’s almost a training tape.

The Kali Maa method (Vedic, 2700 BC) (flickering candles and discordant drum beats) is still being used successfully This is actually true. My daughter went to a psychologist because of PTSD involving an auto accident. The psychologist described it briefly. I said it sounded like Kali Maa, she responded ” that’s primitive, we use computer driven strobe lights and discordant music.” Yeah, right that’s much more modern.

Mr sid is always thought provoking. Here’s his take on this subliminal stuff;

DeathBySideslip SubliminalMessaging DogTrack Traditional Modern

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Reverse Engineer

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on June 4, 2010 by ellocogringo

Reverse Engineering

Return to the minds

The concept that one can reverse-engineer a human mind from an abstract concept is so off the scale of bizarre that it is pathological.. I’ll try math. 2 + 3 = 5. always has been, always will be. It’s deterministic in nature 2 + 3 = ? is also deterministic in the sense that one can derive 5 from the 2 + 3. Saying 5 = ? is indeterminate, it’s nonsense, even insane. Hearing this concept of decision making come from anyone is troubling, hearing it come from someone I like is distressing. Upon hearing this it took me 3 1/2 seconds to realize it was a severe case of PTIB compulsion.
To convey what PTIB is would require a degree in math, a masters in fluid dynamics, and a thesis in quantum mechanics. I could then publish a paper using the chaos theory to describe why not all things belong in baskets. It would then take 10 years for this concept to percolate into Psychology, and some adventurous psychologists would test the hypothesis and write papers on why emotional disorders should not be placed in baskets. The success rate for psychotherapy would skyrocket. Then you’d start having idiots try to bring the witchcraft back in and PTIB would be described in the witch doctors reference manual on psychological disorders as a recognized illness. Why must there be baskets?
The QD Fix is my desperate method of communicating with another a very simple concept. ”Be who you’re supposed to be, not who someone else wants you to be.” They must be self -centered to achieve fulfillment. When someone approaches me with the basic plea “I hurt, heal me” what has happened is that their defense mechanism has broken down, they sense that I am centered and they want the secret magic fix, something to fill the hole in their soul so they don’t have that painful aching need. But there is no secret magic fix. What works for me will not work for them and the abyss will return. They must be self centered. So I do my QD Fix shaking my beads and rattles, dancing naked around the fire, chanting “begone demons”. Because, that is, after all, what the QD Fix is, just a neolithic method of communication that bypasses the defense mechanisms. It works as well now as it did 50,000 years ago.
That’s all a psychotherapist has to be. An emotional mirror. It really is just that simple. Why all the baskets? What possible purpose is served? It destroys meaningful data, and obfuscates the rest.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Spectrum

Posted in The Minds on June 4, 2010 by ellocogringo

Return to the minds

Previously I spent time in Singapore and was struck with the fact of the perceptual difference between the natives and occidentals. When I took my shirts to the cleaners, he asked if I wanted blue dye in them. “most Europeans want blue dye in their shirts” How odd. With only a little checking I found that the “whitening agent” used in detergents is in fact blue dye. You can actually see them, little blue beads among the flakes. To an oriental an occidentals white shirt has a blue tinge. To an occidental white looks “dingy”. Isn’t that odd?

Click to open the graphics

In another incident my amah, Ah Soo, called me to the window to see a particularly striking rainbow, “the three colors are quite distinct”. Sorry, I see five. I looked it up and found there are supposed to be seven. Sorry, still only five. I did some asking around. When a rainbow appeared (there’s a lot of rainbows in Singapore, it’s a tropical country) I would ask a nearby person how many colors he saw. A European would say “seven” then “but this ones only got five”. An Chinese would say five, without hesitation and a Malay would say three without hesitation.

Interestingly, the Malay language is primative, having no written language they have no word for book.  So the borrowed the english word as buka, since they can only count to 3 a book is buka, books are buka, buka, and a library is buka, buka, buka.  They can’t conceptualize 4 of anything.  Hence 3 colors in the rainbow.

I pulled the following off of Wikipedia;

A rainbow spans a continuous spectrum of colours; the discrete bands are an artefact of human color vision…


“Newton originally (1672) named only five primary colours: red, yellow, green, blue and violet. Only later did he introduce orange and indigo, giving seven colours by analogy to the number of notes in a musical scale[30]. The division in distinct colours is an arbitrary convention. It is related to the linguistic question whether the colour terms are mainly culturally determined, and different between people; or biologically determined, and universal for all people (the colour debate). From a physics point of view, the rainbow spans a continuous spectrum of colours — there are no “bands.” – Wikipedia

Colour debate>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity_and_the_color_naming_debate

It would appear then that color is itself an artifact the same as time and sound. Color is the minds way of making sense out of the spectrum. It seems then that all sensory input (vibrations) is brought into the the right hemisphere as perception (frequency domain) and interpreted in the left hemisphere as color, sound, time as what we see, hear and measure, and quantify with graphs, measurements, and rulers.

Another way to look at it is in terms of qualia.

Right mind on right. left mind on left.

Color Perception Secret-1 Secret-2 Perceiving reality Biases Perceptions

Or….. I could be full of shit.  I am crazy, don’t you know?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Education

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , on June 3, 2010 by ellocogringo

“What can we do about it?” – DrB

Return to the minds

In regard imprinting. Interesting question. The word “we” was used with intent. An idiot would say “What can I do about it?’ with resignation. Centereds have a sense of social responsibility, able to balance the individual needs against those of society. An idiot will take the optimum solution for him at the expense of society. Evidently, they want their children to be just as stupid as they are. One would think that all that needed to be done would be to inform the educational system. WRONG! They know, and they’re doing it anyway. They are KNOWINGLY mutilating our children’s minds so as to improve efficiency. That’s what I got so angry about a couple of months back.

The question now becomes “if we didn’t have idiots running the school system, what can we do about it?” The trick would seem to be to enable the bottom up thinking that is crushed by the educational system now. Sitting almost forces top down thinking while standing almost forces bottom up thinking. So one approach would be field trips. Instead of teaching history from a book, get them off their butts and take them to an historical battlefield. “the union troops were up on that hill” (pointing) hiding in the bushes. “The confederate troops came down this path, and were ambushed. The towns people were gathered in the shade under their umbrellas drinking tea, and once the bullets started flying decided that they really needed to get back to their chores” Make it real. On woods excursions teach them important stuff like “don’t wipe with poison ivy” (that’s worth imprinting) or don’t eat the yellow snow.

Sir Ken suggests more emphasis on the arts, particularly drama, and creativity brought into the classroom.

My favorite is learning. I use learn as a transitive verb, I present the data, say what I think about it, and ask for responses. “What do you think?” This is opposed to teaching where opinions are expressed and accepted as fact during the critical period. The Benedictine’s mission was to spread enlightenment, not teach.

“We can’t teach you, we can only show you how to learn” – Bro Max

This critical period is when children become aculturated to society and should be viewed with that in mind. Social mores, interactions, etc. Let them learn what we have evolved to learn in the timeframe which human nature dictates. Hijacking this natural process is no different than brainwashing on a permanent basis. They become idiots.

These are human beings, with a glorious potential. Not a bunch of damned machines to be programmed. Pull, don’t push. Work with nature, don’t try to control it.  Provide a platform to allow them to be who they are supposed to be, not who you want them to be.

Below are two videos by Mr Sir Ken Robinson.  This is his web page, the videos are on the riglht.

Sir Ken Robinson

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Yin Yang

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , on June 1, 2010 by ellocogringo

Feng Shui

Return to the minds

Feng Shui is the state of harmony achieved when the yin and yang (Male and Female) are in balance. This is not a gender related concept except for the singular case of a man and woman. Orientals view life through this tunnel, striving for a state of Feng Shui, maximum qi.  Feng shui fooie.  This is nothing more than the Taoist brain fart.  Orientals are primarily bottom up thinkers and use monasticism to escape the feminine mind society and acquire direction, in the same way that the Occidentals use(d) monasticism to escape the masculine mind society and acquire wisdom.  As the western worldview is sweeping the globe both forms of monasticism are in decline.  The aristotelean brain fart started this trend earlier in the west, but the east is catching up.  It appears we are headed towards a monolithic world wide society of idiots.  Lacking in connectedness and unable to see that we are a part of the “big picture” concerned only with short term goals.

Men read the headlines, women read the small print. Headline in paper “Sadistic murderer savaging streets of Bessimer” a man will grab his gun, a woman will read on and say “hey, wait a minute, it says here that the Little Theater is staging a play on Jack the Ripper” This is as it should be, an an immediate response to imminent danger tempered by a targeted insight. This is the symbiotic relationship between the male and female viewpoints. This is the importance of coupling and why it is essential to civilization.

It is interesting to note that Ayn Rand viewed herself as locked in a room with the beast (A female perspective. I viewed myself as being in a room surronded by the abyss (A male viewpoint.)

what no one seems to realize is that this is all inside the skull.  It is the yin yang war and yang is winning.  Maybe this is what happens when civilizations collapse, as they always have, and always will.  “Progress” is not a continual upward curve but a sawtooth, never falling quite as far as the previous civilization started at.   It doesn’t look good.

“Wonder and wander are like ben-wa balls, wherever one goes the other follows” – eLG

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

mo’ Enemy

Posted in The Minds with tags , , on May 28, 2010 by ellocogringo
Mo’ Enemy
I put my model for how the mind works on one page. WOW!!!  Try explaining that in English.
Understand that psychology, is only a small part of my interest, which I suppose could be loosely described as man’s relationship with the universe (so far, it may change)  I am at present dipping into the psychology basket to further my understanding.  My model representation is to be considered only a tool I use to satisfy my particular needs,  specifically, to understand the TMI Block and more generally why people put things in baskets making the data difficult to retrieve.  The hole in the soul concept came from the spirituality basket.  The taboo came from the zoology basket.  The QD Fix came from the anthropology basket.  The wolf came from the finance basket.  The beast came from the ethics basket.  Why must there be baskets when discussing human nature?  None of these things make sense without considering the others.  The illogical contortions you have to go through without considering all the data is monumental.  All of the data is there, it’s just in different baskets.
Consider the following logic train;
Germans drink more beer than Americans or English and have less heart attacks
French drink more wine than Americans or English and have less heart attacks
Japanese drink more saki than Americans or English and have less heart attacks
Conclusion; Speaking English causes heart attacks
Saki, Wine and Beer are in different baskets and so not considered
It is insanity.  It is self mutilation. This insanity exists in each of the soft baskets.  It takes someone who is unlocked to skip across these baskets and pull out the relevant data.  It takes someone who is centered to restore reason within each basket.  Idiots and assholes just screw things up.
And we haven’t even discussed the commons, justice, education, parenting, values and others I haven’t thought of..
So far I’ve figured out the following aspects of the beast
Who=Everyone has it
What=Rejection of facts and logic
How=Algorithms field forbidden data
When=Neolithic earliest known instances
Where=Soft Sciences
Why=Taboo on pride
During the invasion of Iraq, Bill O’reilly asked a tank commander if there was anything the troops needed.  After pondering for a minute the commander responded “mo’ enemy”. That’s what I got.
So many assholes, so little time

DrB 4/26/2010I put my model for how the mind works on one page. WOW!!!  Try explaining that in English.Understand that psychology, is only a small part of my interest, which I suppose could be loosely described as man’s relationship with the universe (so far, it may change)  I am at present dipping into the psychology basket to further my understanding.  My model representation is to be considered only a tool I use to satisfy my particular needs,  specifically, to understand the TMI Block and more generally why people put things in baskets making the data difficult to retrieve.  The hole in the soul concept came from the spirituality basket.  The taboo came from the zoology basket.  The QD Fix came from the anthropology basket.  The wolf came from the finance basket.  The beast came from the ethics basket.  Why must there be baskets when discussing human nature?  None of these things make sense without considering the others.  The illogical contortions you have to go through without considering all the data is monumental.  All of the data is there, it’s just in different baskets.Consider the following logic train;Germans drink more beer than Americans or English and have less heart attacksFrench drink more wine than Americans or English and have less heart attacksJapanese drink more saki than Americans or English and have less heart attacksConclusion; Speaking English causes heart attacksSaki, Wine and Beer are in different baskets and so not consideredIt is insanity.  It is self mutilation. This insanity exists in each of the soft baskets.  It takes someone who is unlocked to skip across these baskets and pull out the relevant data.  It takes someone who is centered to restore reason within each basket.  Idiots and assholes just screw things up.And we haven’t even discussed the commons, justice, education, parenting, values and others I haven’t thought of..So far I’ve figured out the following aspects of the beastWho=Everyone has itWhat=Rejection of facts and logicHow=Algorithms field forbidden dataWhen=Neolithic earliest known instancesWhere=Soft SciencesWhy=Taboo on prideDuring the invasion of Iraq, Bill O’reilly asked a tank commander if there was anything the troops needed.  After pondering for a minute the commander responded “mo’ enemy”. That’s what I got.So many assholes, so little time

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Dali Time

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , , on May 27, 2010 by ellocogringo

Dali Time

The function of time is the gottcha in the psychological view of the mind. It takes time to think. Imagine the proto human above walking the savannas in the rift valley 2.9 million years ago. If it assumes this posture to think for any length of time, it is lunch. When a threat is spotted it needs to MOVE. So it ended up with a brain only big enough to handle a few rudimentary defense mechanisms, and a limited ability to think when safe. Reflexes could be measured in fractions of a second, reactions in about 1/2 second. Limited responses in 3 1/2 seconds.

The above proto-human is lion lunch if he takes more than half a second to move. For this reason he has limited mental capabilities, and no need for more neurons. With the creation/evolution of wetware, the minds ability increases to allow it to index the data. This means he doesn’t have to remember the data, but only the location of the data. This increased ability allows it to use more neurons and the brain swells from 200cc to 2300+cc. It also allows for more sophisticated defense mechanisms without increasing the reaction time. An elegant solution indeed.

We evolved more brain capacity because we became smart.

We are not smart because we have more brain capacity.

Without the wetware the extra brain capacity would be useless.

The mind is elegant in it’s simplicity

Incomprehensible in it’s scale

And glorious in it’s implementation

Time in a bottle Time is on my side

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Perception

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , on April 28, 2010 by ellocogringo
DrB-34
Three Pound Universe
As reported in The Three-Pound Universe by Judith Hooper and Dick Teresi,
“The image in your head is not a straightforward copy of anything. Palm trees and Ella Fitzgerald’s high notes are represented in your brain by abstract codes. There are no colors, no sounds, and no smells in your neural tissue.”
Both Darwinians and creationists are stuck in ideologies—fixed mental frameworks through which they interpret the phenomena. Wouldn’t it be much more in the spirit of scientific inquiry to leave different avenues of explanation open as one continues to investigate the phenomena? Scientists should enjoy uncertainty and discovery as much as they enjoy fitting facts into a neat conceptual framework.
“wait a minute, who’s in the driver’s seat here—an idea I’ve come to serve, or my search for truth?”
These senses of ‘intelligence’ have been named by rough analogy with creating and the storing of energy as, potential intelligence and kinetic intelligence (Gregory 1987). The notion is that stored-from-the-past potential intelligence of knowledge, is selected and applied to solve current perceptual problems by active processing of kinetic intelligence. The more available knowledge, the less processing is required; however, kinetic intelligence is needed for building useful knowledge, by learning through discovery and testing. (The analogy is imperfect because knowledge is not conserved. Nevertheless, these terms may be useful though, apart from secret knowledge, ‘potential intelligence’ is not diminished by use.) When almost complete answers are available, knowledge takes the dominating role. Then ‘top-down’ becomes more important than ‘bottom-up’, which may be so for human vision. (Remarkably, there are more downwards fibres from the cortex to the lateral geniculate bodies LGN) ‘relay stations’ than bottom-up from the eyes (Sillito 1995).)
An important point is that, in perception, the mind is experiencing a process that it itself is generating, and a theory of perception has to be about that process. If a person is looking at a ball, the person doesn’t perceive the “actual” ball, even though that’s what it seems like. The actual ball is a buzz of subatomic particles somewhere out there in the continuum of matter/energy, some of which interact with light which makes a pattern on the person’s retina in the eye. So, the person doesn’t perceive the actual ball. The person doesn’t even perceive the pattern of light on the retina. Rather, the person’s mind actively generates an image which is kept up to date by interaction with the retina, and it is only the image “in the mind” which is ever experienced. Loosely speaking, the mind is always hallucinating (but hopefully the hallucinations are coordinated with the reality of the objective world). There are many examples which could reinforce this – such as the eye’s blind spot, visual illusions, and the fact that we “see” in dreams – but we aren’t going to go into them here. Instead we take it as given that in perception a mind is experiencing a process which it itself is generating.
At each stage, the perceived component appears to fully characterize the environment. In other words, the component is experienced as the “ground of reality”. So to make this perception prevail, a mind blocks the tests which would allow perceptions of a higher order, since the higher order perceptions refute that the lower component is the “ground of reality”. However, since perception of component 4 is perception of this blocking process and how it operates to enforce perception, a mind at this stage can “override” this blocking process “in principle.” (in fact also)
Mr Ted caught me on a stub.  His quite eloquent (if wordy) analysis of the “3 pound universe” can stand on it’s own.  He doesn’t need my help

Pachyderm

Posted in The Minds with tags , , , , on January 20, 2010 by ellocogringo

Hmm! I’ve got a slightly different take on this. While in complete agreement. I think cause and effect may be getting confused. I.e.. Big Al wasn’t smart because his corpus colosum was thicker, his corpus colosum was thicker because he was smart. Oversimplifying, right brain activity is regarded as metaphysical BS at best and psychotic at worst. This view is imprinted at an early age. For whatever reason this imprinting didn’t take on Einstein. In western society the right mind has been shut down so there’s not a lot of traffic on the “road” The road was expanded (or more precisely not reduced) to accommodate the extra traffic, not the other way around. The same can be said of intelligence in general, People aren’t smarter because they have more neurons, they have more neurons because they are smarter. i.e. human brain processing is more efficient than a chimps, in the sense that chimps operate on bottom up thinking while humans use top down thinking with bottom up thinking being done off line. Indexing is a good analogy. It takes 3 ½ seconds to access the right hemisphere (bottom up) which would eliminate us from the gene pool. I takes about half a second for a chimp to respond because of his lesser neuron count. A reflex can be measured in nano-seconds. It’s all about time.

Or, when presented with a charging elephant, instead of marveling at the pretty wave patterns unfolding in the now, we need to find a big tree to get behind. A 1200 cc brain will get you extinct if you could only think bottom up. Sorry this is turning into an essay.

People think backwards.  Consider, why do we eat sugar?  Because it tastes good right, wrongo?  Sugar tastes good because we eat it.  Rotten fruit, (sugar) is a good source of energy so our brains are wired to give a pleasurable sensation when we eat it.

Or, you could say that in this case bottom up and top down thinking give mutually exclusive answers.