201

Appendix: Linear thinkers and Nonlinear thinkers

Introduction

Here are 2 papers on the neurological differences between linear

thinking Syllogician Schizoids and non-linear thinking Aspergian

Schizoids. Paper 1 introduces the theoretical background needed to

appreciate paper 2, which deals with the topic of linear and nonlinear

thinking.

These papers, though scientific in the Lakatosian sense, have some

rough parts, partly due to the difficult nature of the content being

communicated. They need some concentration, and certainly more

than one readings, and thinking between reading, to understand! The

only comfort is that these are more interesting and more important

than most technical presentations; those who read and understand it

will gain a lot.

New readers shouldnt hastily conclude that this is too complex, it

is truly very simple! If unable to understand something, just move on

and tackle it later.

Neurons are the cells in brain etc. which are responsible for thought

etc. Neurotransmitters e.g.: the 3 named in below picture, are

chemicals which travel between neurons, for enabling thought or its

subcomponents etc.

202

Paper 1: The task-cycles of Dopamine and Norepi

The layouts and activities of Dopamine (D), Norepi (N), and

Serotonin (S), the three Classical Monoamine neurotransmitters,

are particularly important in the psychology of the Central Nervous

System, because:

1. Activities involving these neurotransmitters coincide

with major mental events, e.g.: thought according to

scientists

2. These neurotransmitters occur in a super-system

which we define as the dynamic front. This makes

them important, as the dynamic front is important:

The dynamic front is a set which includes 2 neuron sections, and the

N or D molecule goes from one neuron's section to the other's. The D

or N receptor and transmitter are attached in these 2 sections

respectively; considering each neuron section a separate system unto

itself taking as the analogue male and female systems as the

example of movement of sperm i.e. impregnation resulting in major

biological event (pregnancy) shows the movement of actors (D or

N) across the dynamic front is generally important, in the context of

biological systems.

203

Of particular importance are the largest neurotransmitters which

operate in the dynamic front, which are the 3 monoamine

neurotransmitters viz. D, S, and N. The presence of the amine makes

them important as unleashers of energy (12), but we will not be

focusing on S we shall focus on D and N, as they are psychological

rivals. (S is beyond the scope of this thesis, which is justified as S has

a logistical rather than psychological role, unlike D and N, as we shall

now see).

Studying the evolution of D and N which, like the sperm in case

impregnation, are central is therefore sufficient to understand the

evolution of the dynamic front super-system whose central

components are D, N, and S; all other dynamic front chemicals and

neuron sections involved (in thought, for example) are merely

adjutant support systems which we can ignore, as support systems

are logical dependents on the D/N task systems, whose evolutions are

enough to study.

Thus we start with the premise that the layouts and activities of

Dopamine (D), Norepi (N), and Serotonin (S), are particularly

important in the quantum psychology of the Central Nervous System.

Quantum psychology has nothing to do with quantum physics, and it

is not a difficult concept. It means the smallest characterizable

behavior of the nervous system's smallest (central) differentiable

components. In other words, there is a quantum neuropsychological

function associated with D (or N), which is about how the system/

apparatus associated with the D or N task-cycle, intercepts and

modifies incoming signals as per certain simple, logical rules, as we'll

see which makes these modifications the psychological events at

the smallest scale, that is, quantum neuropsychological events that

is the meaning if we say the "quantum neuropsychological function" of

D or N.

All other entities are support systems and the D/N task cycle's

skeletal apparatus is central therefore, before proto-neurons

which contained only what is central rather than all the secondary

features became complex like modern neurons there were still D,

N, and S task-cycles, which (psychologically) are the same as in

modern neurons. Hence we can study the roles of task-cycles of D

and N, across evolution of life-forms, and that will be the modern role

of D and N.

To summarize: the proto-dynamic front task-cycle had, for either D or

N, a quantum neuropsychological function which is the same as the

204

quantum neuropsychological function in the modern neuron, whose

other complexities we can ignore in our quest to find the eternal,

significant quantum neuropsychological function of the D/N/S task-

cycle.

Support for drawing such conclusions is the ancient creature sponge,

in which sperm cells exist and have the exact same role as what

sperm cells have in higher creatures, showing thus the immutability

of the central task-cycle of the dynamic front, which in our case are D

and N task-cycles.

As signals progress through the nervous system's signal cables (the

slender parts of neurons i.e. axons and dendrites), they either die out

due to transmission loss, or, if regarded as valid by some biological

rules, they are boosted as per D or N's signal boosting characteristic,

of which it is said:

"Intracortical currents are triggered by the release of

neurotransmitters, in particular, that neuromodulators like

noradrenaline, dopamine or serotonin have indirect modulating

effects" - Frodl-Bauch et al., 1999, as quoted in the Nieuwenhuis et al.

paper (12).

Enhance the synaptic responses of cortical neurons to their other

inputs, in effect increasing the gain of cortical neuronal activity, thus

N might serve to amplify signal conduction" (12). And similar is the

role of D, since both D and N are chemically very similar. Thus, these

neurotransmitters boost signals, if valid. D and N have different

conditionality for determining which signals are valid/to be boosted,

as we'll see.

Now let us study the conditionality for boosting, which tells us the

quantum neuropsychological role of Dopamine and Norepinephrine.

Studying the evolution of D, N, and S to find the (eternal)

quantum neuropsychological details of the Central Nervous

System

As Dobzhansky said: "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the

light of evolution. Well now study the key stages in the evolution of

the nervous system/life-form.

Life forms are ultra-complex chemical reactions, and

neurotransmitters are stable ranged chemicals defining their

deepest aspects (reactions taking place across the longest range).

Now S has a specific unique structure which puts it on a league of its

own, but D (Dopamine), O (Octopamine), and N (Norepinephrine)

205

have similar structures, which means that all three can be clubbed as

similar.

S is found in plants as well where it guides major operations; S is

thus one of the most ancient of the dynamic front molecules. D is also

found in plants, and though both D and S may therefore be found in

plants, they dont occur in the relevant D-S system type of nervous

system (D-S interactions set), due to which we can define the plant as

merely a simple S base of reactions, rather than D-S base of reactions.

I.e. we define an aspect of the dynamic front of the CNS or proto-CNS

as base of reactions let us say, base of reactions means the central

class of chemical reactions in the multifaceted chemical reaction life-

form.

In the science of major aka disruptive evolutions, which must occur

in the critical dynamic front theory is: to see disruptive evolutions

as accidents!

In one such accident, D and S entered into a highly specific set of

reactions (D-S interactions), which was the birth of the D-S base of

reactions.

It is established that S plays a major role in modulating D systems;

we call it D-S base of reactions; the rise of which, was the first

complexity in life-form evolution, beyond the simple plant, in which

the D pyramid of reactions and the S pyramid of reactions are not

reacting in the specific style that defines the D-S base of reactions/D-S

interactions set.

We might choose to reserve the term animal for bilaterally

symmetric animals, and call the D-S-base of reactions-based life-

form, as "planimal".

An example that can be cited is the sponge, in which have been found

both Dopamine (2) and Serotonin (3) by scientists. That is worth

analysis... The sponge has long been superficially recognized as the

missing link between plant and animal, and where else but, of

course, the dynamic front, could be the area where the difference

arises! Soon we will further vindicate our view that the sponge is a D-

S base of reactions, and not any more complex than that (as are other

creatures).

206

Thus the planimal, like sponge a life-form defined by how the D-S

base was chief in its hierarchy of reactions evolved when the plant

bodily molecule of D entered into this highly specific D-S interactions

set with S thus giving both D and S the pioneering status of

neurotransmitter, birthing the proto-nervous system, which was at

the heart of this creature called planimal, whereby cells collaborated

in a lifestyle more complex than that of plant the planimal was the

first quasi-animal.

And now, in another disruptive evolution, yet another accident

occurred: D maybe evolved into O (Octopamine) in some domains; or

at least we can say that O, a molecule seen to exist in certain plants

(but not in the nervous system capacity), was "captured" by the D-S

base of reactions.

Some of these accidental events were biologically "successful" i.e.

some O-involving reactions were accepted by the old D-S base of

reactions the law of entropy allowed the sum to thrive. However, O

and D are chemically similar, and, to an extent, can be likened to

capstones competing for control of the same adjunct molecule

pyramids for the purpose of reaction. There might be a wide range of

such adjunct molecules.

This "mutation" was, then, the rise of the O-D-S (or D-O-S) base of

reactions, with O-D-S defined by the primacy of O in the total

reactions pyramid (life-form), and D-O-S defined by the primacy of D

in the total reactions pyramid (life-form). Thus the rise of O sprouted

two types of creatures. The D-O-S or O-D-S creature is called animant,

we may say.

207

Now, the animant differs from the planimal (e.g.: sponge), just how

planimal differs from plant. However, the animant could still fuse

like the sponge (two sponges may fuse with each other, and "average

out" their traits).

This we say because there is a compelling theory about the next step

in evolution:

Thus, sometime after the rise of the 2 types of animant, was the

fusing accident, when a pre-trilobite creature emerged as the fused

D-O-S + O-D-S creature i.e., the bi-brained invertebrate animal that

had bilateral symmetry. It was a most successful design; even we are

bilaterally symmetric! Nearly all are like that, excepting a few

animants like Jellyfish and hydra, which are radially, not bilaterally

symmetric, showing that the O-D-S or D-O-S super-reaction is found

in them, not both.

208

The Left Brain/right body was D-O-S (and then D-N-S), where D has

primacy (the neural correlates of such primacy are yet to be found,

but it appears to have something to do with capturing of the

amygdala), and the Right Brain/left body was O-D-S (and then N-D-S)

where O (and then N) had primacy.

There was, further, another disruptive evolution when O changed

into the similar N (Norepi). Merely on the basis of how vertebrates

have N whereas invertebrates have O, we can say that N brought into

the picture a new ability for the nervous system to be decentralized,

as borne out by the presence of spinal cord (which is main detail,

beyond the vertebra). Otherwise, psychologically, O and N seem

similar, seem to have similar task-cycles. But we have deviated in

covering these interesting details of evolution. Our original purpose

was to find the quantum neuropsychological roles of D and N. Let us

get back to the task of finding the nature of D and O/N task-cycles,

assuming that O is, psychologically, the same as N, and only different

physiologically.

Isolating the essential nature of the D task-cycle

Generally, D works in a certain stimuli-reactive style (which we

therefore call "receptive"), while O/N works in a different manner

which can be called "generative". The stimuli-reactive (receptive)

nature of D was found from examples; note the consistent presence

of characterizable stimuli:

1. In plants, D handles browning (4) in response to injury (i.e., injury

is a type of stimuli occurrence of which triggered a D Task-Cycle; so

here the D task-cycle is reacting to a stimuli... This will be a consistent

observation).

2. D is released by algae Ulvaria obscura, as an anti-herbivore defense

mechanism (5)

(herbivore was a stimuli received by the algae, leading to a reaction,

initiating which was the role of D task-cycle, which is thus again seen

to have reacted to stimuli).

In complex creatures, despite the presence of complex bases of

reactions, D activity is observed to be involved in reaction to stimuli:

3. In insects, D acts as a punishment signal necessary to form

aversive memories" (6)

(aversive memories of external objects, which were stimuli to the

insect, reaction to which stimuli, shows the D task-cycle's isolatable

nature as reactive to stimuli)

209

4. D (task-cycles are observed when) the creature gets aroused (6)

(arousal is, again, a response to external objects characterizable as

stimuli).

5. D task-cycles are found to occur as responses to various stimuli like

money, prospect of sex, food etc.

6. The spinal cords diencephalospinal dopaminergic system was

discovered; it handles the auto-reactions to stimuli, like withdrawing

from heat, knee-jerk etc.

7. In particular, the sponge, which, according to the theory, gives an

example of a pure D-S nervous system:

Sponge lacks nervous, digestive or circulatory systems; instead the

water flow supports all these functions. However most species have

the ability to perform movements that are coordinated all over their

bodies, mainly contractions squeezing the water channels and thus

expelling excess sediment and other substances that may cause

blockages [whose presence were stimuli which caused action, thus it

was a reaction]. Sponges may contract to reduce the area vulnerable

to attack [a response conforming to attacker stimuli]. The

mechanism is unknown, but may involve chemicals similar to

neurotransmitters. Actually, the mechanism involves D Task-

cycle(s) in the sponges D-S proto-CNS, a D task-cycle supported by a

very basic support system (thanks to University of Tokyo

researchers, who've ascertained the presence of Dopamine in some

species of sponge (2)).

The sponge's type of purely receptive (stimuli-reactive) behaviour

vindicates our earlier statement that sponge is home to no more than

the D-S base of reactions.

Isolating the essential nature of the O/N task-cycle

It is already stated that, while physiologically N and O are different,

psychologically they are the same. Hence we can cite here examples

of both O and N, as the quantum neuropsychological role of both are

the same. While D-S is involved in reactive behaviours, O-S/N-S

system seems involved with more than just knee jerk-type reactions

to stimuli.

1. In the locust jump, O modulates muscle activity, making the leg

muscles contract more effectively.

Jumping is not directly a reaction to any particular stimuli.

2. Similarly, O is widely used by invertebrates in energy-demanding

[novel, not automatic or stimuli reactive] behaviours like flying,

210

egg-laying, and jumping. These are not dependent on any isolatable

stimuli, as was in the case of D.

3. "In the firefly, Octopamine release leads to production of light in

the lantern".

A definite pattern is seen O, the precursor of N, is involved with

contrived actions which are not direct stimuli-responses. It appears

that several signals, rather than 1 signal (stimuli) is involved in the

case of O or N.

For example, fire-fly puts on a lantern depending on, say:

1. Whether or not it is night (a TRUE or FALSE value, conveyed

as a signal or no signal)

2. Whether or not a female is nearby (a TRUE or FALSE value,

conveyed as a signal or no signal)

3. (And/or something else that is known as a signal, such as

whether or not enough fuel for putting on the light, TRUE or

FALSE)

Thus all three must be TRUE, only then will the O task-cycle occur

and light will come on. So O/N seems like an AND gate, from this

perspective. N, the psychological equivalent of O, also handles,

similarly, complex activations (complex, in the sense, not directly

reactive to stimuli):

"In 1964, Chapman and Bragdon [11] found that ERP responses to

visual stimuli differed depending on whether the stimuli had

meaning or not. They found that the responses contained a large

positivity [a signalling event, called P300 event potential, and later

proven to involve N] that peaked around 300 ms after the stimulus

appeared".

"They speculated that this differential response, which came to be

known as P300, resulted due to how the [stimuli] were meaningful to

the participants.

This P300 wave was subsequently associated with the Locus

Coerelus-Norepinephrine neuromodulatory system by researchers

(8, 9, 10).

This seems to be a mere stimuli response, but it is more than just

that, as we'll now see.

In this case, the N-involving P300 task-cycle was dependent on

multiple inputs that is the meaning of the term meaningful which

they use.

Let us see the same experiment in more detail:

211

"In later studies published in 1967, Sutton and colleagues had subjects

guess whether they would hear one click or two clicks. They again

observed a positivity around 300 ms after the second click occurred - or

would have occurred, in the case of the single click... They also had

subjects guess how long the interval between clicks might be, and in

this case, the late positivity occurred 300 ms after the second click".

Thus, in case of Norepi task-cycle, whatever the answer to be solved,

multiple relevant signals add up to solve it:

4. "They again observed a positivity around 300 ms after the second

click occurred".

N-calculated solution = 2 clicks, which is solved out of 2 signals

(click1 AND click2) thus 2 input signals (quasi-stimuli) were used

to generate output.

5. "Or would have occurred, in the case of the single click".

N-calculated solution = signal 1 click AND signal no more clicks =

only 1 click.

Thus, again, multiple signals are required for the O/N task-cycle to

"trip". Once again we see that the O/N task-cycle is similar to an AND

gate.

6. The P300 is thought to reflect processes involved in stimulus

evaluation or categorization.

Evaluation/categorization implies stimuli being weighed in the

context of certain other data which again upholds the multi-input

nature.

Thus the N-task-cycle calculates from various signals and gives the

type of output required so this output is generated out of multiple

signals.

About this many-in, 1-out type of signalling, Nieuwenhuis et al. offer

(12): NE release gated by the LC-NE system is elicited after neurons

processing sensory information have presumably reached a decision

threshold. The phasic burst can alter activation in

all cortical processing layers, essentially collapsing the vast

information processing circuit to the outcome of a single decision

layer.

The differences between Dopaminic and Norepic type of

processing

212

Thus the difference is between D's simple stimuli/signal-reactive aka

monoconditional signalling and N's complex reactive multiconditional

signalling.

N has ability to consider signals from multiple directions (signal

cables), not just one (as appears to be the case in the D task cycle).

Another very interesting detail is that Norepi task-cycle sites are

axons of neurons: " widespread effects of noradrenaline on axon

terminals" (13); Dopamine task-cycle sites are dendrites of neurons;

Yao et al.: Dopamine receptors are present throughout the soma and

dendrites of the neuron, but accumulating ultrastructural and

biochemical evidence indicates that they're concentrated in dendritic

spines" (14).

We have, then, enough proof to state: the rise of the O-S-D base of

reactions, was when from the sponge emerged the proto-Axon,

having a talent of using an O-involving process to discriminatingly

relay orders to other cells (rather than tyrannically declaring, always

stay on) those cells then gladly adapted to the leadership, taking on

roles.

That brought about the rise of specialized organs (which are absent in

sponges, who lack O/N), and evolutionary intelligence. Because, for

organs to work, the discriminatory (multiconditional) signalling is

required (no organs can function at the "always on" or directly

stimuli-reactive mode). We can refer to this organ-growing property

of O/N by the term "localized evolutionary intelligence"107. It is

absent in sponges, which " lack nervous, digestive or circulatory

systems" our characterization of the sponge as a merely D-S base of

reactions, is further proven.

The "organ master" role of N is apparent: for it triggers the release of

glucose from energy stores, increases blood flow, heart rate, oxygen

supply etc. in the fight-or-flight situation (which is not direct reaction

to stimuli).

And similarly, Axons also seem like taskmasters of organs:

At synapses, axons make contact with other cells, usually other

neurons but sometimes muscle or gland cells [axons give orders with

discriminating ability]

107 O is found in plants having localized evolutionary intelligence e.g.: bitter orange (7).

213

The Axon/O/N's organ master role is confirmed in how Livingstone

et al. observed that injecting O into a lobster and crayfish resulted in

limb and abdomen extension (15).

D and N as logic gate constituents of behavioural neural

networks

Smoking is a well-known involver of D task cycles, let us see what

happens there.

Smokers were found to have more dendritic development (28). The

smoking-related dendritic/dopaminic task-cycle systems (check-

posts) are such that, on receipt of signal from valid direction108 they

automatically trigger D Task-cycles, which boost and convey the

signal into action-linked brain areas, causing autonomous impulse to

smoke.

Journey of red data through transmitting axons is felt by many

dendritic spines, which contain dopaminic check-posts; if relevant to

dopaminic trigger (as in the bull who gets angry on seeing red), the

triggers, being associated with D checkposts, are tripped, causing a

reaction.

The circuit's D trigger element is comparable to the simple falling

domino: if stimuli fits (i.e. if signal comes from right direction) the

D task-cycle is tripped, and the signal is boosted into a predefined

direction. D has a basic cause-effect/triggering mechanism the life-

form design uses Ds type of simple, monoconditional, one-in-one-out

trigger mechanism to build complex neuronal arrangements

(circuits). Similarly with N, whose multiconditional signalling feature is used.

Thus these neurotransmitters themselves are at the center of the life-

form, as the dynamic front theory suggests. In the D or N-involving

events, which can be called signal(s)-modification events the

neurotransmitter, not its generator (Locus Coeruleus or Substantia

Nigra) is central in the quantum level signal-modification event;

every other brain system associated with the process, despite having

a relatively quantitative presence, is more likely merely a support

system. Thus the quantum episode is about Dopamine or Norepis

immediate task cycle apparatus's modification of neurodata, how this

modification follows in case of either neurotransmitter consistent

logical laws.

108 Sight of cigarette, smell of smoke, drop in body Nicotine levels, may all be valid

signals, to be boosted the dopaminic AI has learnt redirected into impulse to smoke.

214

It is about how the neurotransmitter reacted to neurodata i.e.

converted neurodata (signals) to another logically following

neurodata; it is not about an advanced neural control system which

gave input to the Locus Coerelus-Norepinephrine modulatory system,

which then sent the Norepi molecules onward which is a

misconception probably inspired from the popular but misleading

myth about the "Dopamine reward system". That false view imagines

the neurotransmitter factory (LC/SN) as a system that releases N or

D according to various inputs and not merely a minor refilling

system which is what it actually seems to be. When the LC

generates Norepi, it is not on the basis of any other input apart from

the input provided by the vesicle which said My Norepi molecules

were spent in local reactions, refill me, or some such thing (The

particulars of these mechanisms themselves are beyond the scope of

this thesis).

This style in which D or N acts is used by signal-progressing neural

circuits both more D-reliant, less N-reliant circuits and more N-

reliant, less D-reliant circuits. Such are the circuits which colour the

nature of one's personality, which is all about how the myriads of D

or N are arrayed, so that a person behaves in specific ways depending

on the programming.

Thus, surely, if one asks, "What makes a brain different from the

other brain"? The answer is the layout of D and N "checkposts",

which are arranged in different permutations and combinations

representing different behaviours. If there is any fundamental

arrangement coding, which one can analogize to DNA, it is this D/N

coding, much of which seems changeable. There are hundreds if not

thousands of different behaviours (expressible as D/N signal-

modifying circuits), the majority of which may be similar from human

to human.

As a general matter of terminology, the dopaminic process, as it is

more stimuli dependent, is called receptive process, and circuits

dependent on more dopaminic processing belong to the Receptive

System (RS).

For N, similarly, we speak of the generative process and the

Generative System (GS). Humans having many more D-type

behavioural circuits (instincts), are called high RQ (Receptive

Quotient) people... and some of their instincts can be very complex.

Some behaviours can be called largely reactive/dopaminic (thus

housed mostly in the left brain, which takes up such tasks) and

others can be called largely Norepic (and thus housed mostly in the

215

right brain, which takes up such tasks). One can segregate behaviours

into these 2 types.

For example:

Table 1

Relatively Dopaminic Relatively Norepic

A lifestyle involving internalizing what

others are thinking, what are in their

minds (shows a quantitative dependence

on external stimuli)

A lifestyle of playing "Game Theory" (in

which every move of others must be

noted and counters taken for "success")

A lifestyle involving

thinking, i.e., processing

data that is in one's own

mind

A relaxed lifestyle based

on cooperation, not

cut-throat competition!

Logical ability as it involves the internal processing of data (signals)

and only qualitative reaction to stimuli, more than quantitative

reaction to stimuli naturally involves more N, and the N-dominated

right brain (26).

Generally, behaviours which are cut-throat hyper-competitive (a

lifestyle of competition with a negative emphasis on cooperation)

are more reliant on D; behaviours which more involve logical

refinements (a lifestyle of cooperation) are generally more involving

N.

In what seems an apologetic for cut-throat competitive behaviours,

we are presented with the Dopaminergic mind hypothesis "Dr.

216

Previc presents the provocative theory that, approximately 80,000

years ago, high levels of dopamine led to the profound developmental

leaps that most set modern man apart from his human and primate

relatives".

This "pro-Dopamine" school of thought ascribes intelligence to hyper-

Dopamine mentality:

"A general theory is proposed that attributes the origins of

human intelligence to an expansion of dopaminergic systems

in human cognition" (16)

"Dopamine is postulated to be the key neurotransmitter

regulating six predominantly left-hemispheric cognitive skills

critical to human language and thought: motor planning,

working memory, cognitive flexibility, abstract reasoning,

temporal analysis/sequencing, and generativity"(16).

The reason for a pro-dopamine stance may be the same as why

excess Grey Matter was declared an indicator of intelligence it was

more common in the financially successful families of some biased

scholars. However, matters of wealth must be wholly separated from

matters of health!

A different viewpoint on Dopamine seems necessary given how

several disorders have been associated with Dopamine hyperactivity

to name a few, Schizophrenia, Kannerian Autism, obsessive

compulsive disorders, and ADHD. A paradigm shift is required the

theory now presented sees Norepi as the post-planimal's primary

neurotransmitter, and sees Dopamine as an outsider (to an extent) in

the brain, an organ whose rise began with rise of the multiconditional

signalling Norepi.

The Neuropyrosis theory

Below are shown the pathways of Dopamine (black) and Norepi

(green) respectively.

217

The upper brain is the natural ecology for N as seen in how N

travels farther, i.e., has greater range of operation across the brain...

On the other hand, apart from certain ancient areas (i.e. cerebellum

and basal ganglia), D is found only in relatively insignificant amounts

in the rest of the brain.

Notably, D is found in the Pre-Frontal Cortex, where it has, beyond

the basic necessary extent, an anomalous existence, according to the

present theory.

The theory of anomaly is confirmed by how Morn et al., who

specifically characterize the prefrontal cortex as a region with low

levels of the dopamine transporter, note: In the striatum and basal

ganglia, dopamine is inactivated by reuptake via the DAT. In the

prefrontal cortex109, however, there are very few DAT proteins, and

dopamine is inactivated instead by reuptake via the Norepinephrine

transporter (17).

Yavich et al. (18) give us another interesting observation: The DAT

pathway is roughly an order of magnitude faster than the NET

pathway: in mice, dopamine concentrations decay with a half-life of

200 milliseconds in the caudate nucleus versus 2,000 milliseconds in

the prefrontal cortex.

The longer lifespan as well as the cuckoo characteristic, implies that

D is actually thriving (in a calculative role) due to an upper-brain

style, advanced Norepic neural ecology where the over-activity of D

109 [where excessive presence of monoconditional signalling is anomalous/unhealthy]

218

causes problems, according to the Neuropyrosis theory, which will be

now described.

The increased activity of Dopamine, and lesser activity of Norepi (in

this case, it is always a Yin Yang110), in the brains of Alzheimer's

disease patients, is found by Heneka et al., who say AD individuals

show ~ 70% loss of locus coeruleus (LC) cells and Degeneration of

the locus coeruleus might be responsible for increased A deposition

in AD.

The neuropyrosis theory states: A brain in which D is excessively in

control, so that there is more dendrital development (more grey

matter) suffers damage from overheating. Why? A brain/PFC more

dependent on Dopaminic monoconditional processing, by nature

witnesses greater signal density, as per the diagram seen above.

Second point is that more D task-cycles are needed for receptive

behaviours as a relatively basic (monoconditional) type of 'logic

gate' is being overused hence, in case of left hemisphere dominance

of the brain, D task-cycles occur in much greater number than the

number of N task-cycles occurring in the right hemisphere dominated

brain.

110 Dopamine, due to enjoying a chemical structure that is largely similar to that of

Norepi/Octopamine can carry out some reactions in which N was originally involved

(e.g.: be uptaken by the Norepinephrine transmitter) and N/O, from the start, had

some reactions resembling reactions of D. Therefore, it seems N and D can, to a large

extent, compete for fitting into the brain's reaction pyramids. That makes people have

either excess N (so they are right brain dominant) or excess D (left brain dominant). The

latter means that the whole brain, even the right brain, becomes relatively dendritic

(e.g. Fingelkurts et al. note that depressed people have less hemispheric specialization)

219

That fact implies, as each D/N task-cycle adds the same amount of

energy to in-brain electrical energy, an overall greater signal density.

The increased signal density (which is due to more dopamine task-

cycles) in case of Alzheimer's disease, is discussed by Alice Walton of

Forbes:

"The famous culprit in Alzheimers disease, amyloid-beta plaques, is

found to accumulate following increased brain cell activity.

Specifically, theres evidence that people who have more activity in

their default mode networks may have increased risk for Alzheimers

disease. As researcher David Holtzman of Washington University

says, people whose default mode networks have an average increase

in activity relative to others may be at increased risk to get

Alzheimers disease later in life and less activity in this network, less

risk.

The default mode network involves the dendritic LT-area111, which is

well developed in syllogicians.

The increased signal density in case of Alzheimer's disease is further

confirmed in how the lateral ventricles, which carry ventricular fluid

to support neural activity by cleaning out metabolic waste, are

enlarged in Alzheimer's disease, which again shows excess signalling

activity.

And quantitative existence of signals in the brain is a very

devastating thing for brain tissue. Each time a signal passes through a

neuron, some loss occurs on the way. This loss is converted to heat

(the electrical equivalent of friction). Overheating causes neuronal

collapse and "neuroinflammation" (which is a repair reaction) in

critical areas like hippocampus (which handles conceptualization),

EC, PFC etc.

Effect of overheating due to excessive monoconditional signalling aka

receptive activity:

111 Burgess et al. (1) sum up the default mode theory of the ["LT-area", see paper 2]:

This influential theory relates specifically to medial rostral PFC, and is motivated by the

repeated finding of decreases in activation of medial area 10 during a wide range of

demanding cognitive tasks (Christoff, Ream, & Gabrieli, 2004; Gusnard & Raichle, 2001).

Raichle et al. (2001) argue that when an individual is awake and alert yet not actively

engaged in an attention-demanding task, a default state of brain activity exists.

When focused attention is required, in novel activity, activity in these areas is lessened.

220

Increased volume of current pass through areas critical to thinking,

which are destroyed in AD:

Memory transfer area Entorhinal Cortex, one of the first to show

damage in AD (21)

Thus, just how a piece of thermocol rapidly shrinks if exposed to

heat, or how the plastic covering of an electrical cable melts if too

much current passes through it hyper-signalling associated with

the nature of D destroys the substrate (i.e. neuronal dendrites and

axons).

The neuropyrosis i.e. Overheating theory of AD, explains AD better

than current hypotheses like:

Herpes simplex virus type 1 has been proposed to play a causative

role.

221

The tau hypothesis is the idea that tau protein abnormalities initiate

the disease cascade. In this model, hyperphosphorylated tau begins

to pair with other threads of tau. Eventually, they form

neurofibrillary tangles inside nerve cell bodies. However, it would

seem that collapse due to overheating occurs first, and rubble is just

its result.

In 1991, the amyloid hypothesis postulated that beta-amyloid (A)

deposits are the fundamental cause of the disease. That reflects the

same misguided methodology black beads result from burning of

thermocol, rather than causing its burning; they are only caused, not

causal.

Thus an experimental vaccine was found to clear the amyloid

plaques in early human trials, but it did not have any effect on

dementia.

The oldest, on which most currently available drug therapies are

based, is the cholinergic hypothesis, which proposes that AD is

caused by reduced synthesis of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine.

The cholinergic hypothesis has not maintained widespread support,

because medications intended to treat acetylcholine deficiency have

been ineffective.

Nunomura, et al. implicate oxidative stress in AD (24), but the root

cause is the neuropyrosis activity related to dopamine hyperfunction

and Norepic hypofunction.

Dementia is bad by itself. But what is worse about neuropyrosis is

that people who will suffer from Alzheimer's disease, also suffer

depression. Depression seems a very specific signal of the brain

affected by neuropyrosis, as the same observations are visible in the

depressed and demented brain: Default mode network shows

greater activity when depressed participants ruminate (22).

Further, Depression involves enlargement of lateral ventricles (23),

like AD.

The idea that it is a hyper-RS state that causes Alzheimer's disease by

neuropyrosis, is confirmed in how, "In Alzheimer's disease (AD),

brain atrophy has been proposed to be left lateralized" (19) (i.e. more

atrophy in the left brain hemisphere) in the light of the detail that

the left brain hemisphere is dominated by Dopamine, relative to right

hemisphere.

As shown by Magda Ilcewicz-Klimek et al., who show that depression

involves increased connectivity between the default mode network

and the subgenual cingulate (25) one cannot generally say that

222

depression is only because of more Dopamine rather, increased

dopamine, less Norepi is associated with hyperfunction in the

Receptive System; Generative System is hypoactive, thus qualitative

brain areas (e.g.: the Non linear thinking area just behind the middle

of the eyes, which we study next) are not utilized. That is associated

with excessive D activity in critical areas, which end up as the sites of

neuropyrosis.

The super-process doesnt involve qualitative areas (like the NLT-

area studied next), and therefore, quantitatively burdens critical

areas (e.g.: hippocampus), which are like over-burdened marchers

slowing down the whole brain, leading to motivation deficit, failure

to engage, fatalism, pessimism etc.

The prevention, if not cure, is simply to restrict the overly Dopaminic

kind of activities mentioned in table 1. The basic problem is that

humanity is estranged from its natural habitat i.e. nature, and thrust

into a wastefully competitive (overly frictional) pseudo-ecology in

which overly dopaminic behaviours are encouraged, because of

which the mutable brain becomes more receptive (you are what you

do).

For improving quality of life, humanity must develop a new ecology,

whose quantitative aspects are natural; qualitative aspects are

artificial; and, in which, inter-dwelling distance is standardized and

maximized.

223

- References-

(1) Burgess, P. W., Veitch, E., & Costello, A. (submitted). The role of

the right rostral prefrontal cortex in multitasking: The six element

test.

(2) Hongwei Liu et al. (2004), Isolation of Araguspongine M, a New

Stereoisomer of an Araguspongine/Xestospongin alkaloid, and

Dopamine from the Marine Sponge Neopetrosia exigua Collected in

Palau

(3) Simon Weyrer et al., Serotonin in Porifera? Evidence from

developing Tedania ignis, the Caribbean fire sponge (Demospongiae),

Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 44: 659-665. Brisbane. ISSN

0079-8835.

(4) Mayer, AM (2006). "Polyphenol oxidases in plants and fungi:

Going places? A review". Phytochemistry 67 (21): 23182331.

(5) Van Alstyne et al. (2006). "Dopamine functions as an

antiherbivore defense in the temperate green alga Ulvaria obscura

(6) Schwaerzel M et al. (2003). "Dopamine and octopamine

differentiate between aversive and appetitive olfactory memories in

Drosophila

(7) Tang, F; Tao, L; Luo, X; Ding, L; Guo, M; Nie, L; Yao, S (2006).

"Determination of octopamine, synephrine and tyramine in Citrus

herbs by ionic liquid improved 'green' chromatography".

(8) Lutzenberger, W., Elbert, T., Rockstroth, B. (1987). A brief tutorial

on the implications of volume conduction for the interpretation of the

EEG. Journal of Psychophysiology, 33. S56.

(9) Pineda, J.A.; Foote, S.L.; Neville, H.J. (1989). "Effects of Locus

Coeruleus Lesions on Auditory Event-Related Potentials in Monkey".

J. Neurosci 9 (1): 8193.

(10) Johnson, R.; Jr (1993). "On the neural generators of the P300

component of the event-related potential". Psychophysiology 30 (1):

9097. PMID 8416066

(11) Chapman, R.M. & Bragdon, H.R. (1964). Evoked responses to

numerical and non-numerical visual stimuli while problem solving.

Nature, 203, 1155-1157.

(12) Nieuwenhuis S, Cohen J D. , Aston-Jones G, Decision Making, the

P3, and the Locus CoeruleusNorepinephrine System

224

(13) P Mobley and P Greengard, 1984, Evidence for widespread

effects of noradrenaline on axon terminals in the rat frontal cortex,

Yale School of Medicine

(14) Yao WD, Spealman RD, Zhang J, Dopaminergic signaling in

dendritic spines, Biochem Pharmacol. 2008 Jun 1;75(11):2055-69.

(15) Livingstone, Margaret; Ronald Harris-Warrick, Edward Kravitz

(1980) "Serotonin and Octopamine Produce Opposite Postures in

Lobsters". Science 208 (4439): 7679.

doi:10.1126/science.208.4439.76. PMID 17731572.

(16) Previc FH, 1999, Dopamine and the origins of human

intelligence, Flight Stress Protection Division, Brooks Air Force Base,

Texas

(17) Morn JA et al., 2002, Dopamine uptake through the

norepinephrine transporter in brain regions with low levels of the

dopamine transporter: evidence from knock-out mouse lines. The

Journal of Neuroscience, January 15, 2002, 22 (2):389395

(18) Yavich, Forsberg, Karayiorgou, Gogos, Mnnist 2007, Site-

Specific Role of Catechol-O-Methyltransferase in. Dopamine Overflow

within Prefrontal Cortex and. Dorsal Striatum. Journal of

Neuroscience (impact factor: 7.11). 10/2007; 27(38):10196-209.

DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0665-07.2007

(19) Derflinger S et al. (2011), Grey-matter atrophy in Alzheimer's

disease is asymmetric but not lateralized., J Alzheimers Dis.

2011;25(2):347-57. doi: 10.3233/JAD-2011-110041.

(20) Michael T. Heneka et al., Locus ceruleus controls Alzheimer's

disease pathology by modulating microglial functions through

norepinephrine, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 March 30; 107(13):

60586063.

(21) Rahul S. Desikan et al., 2010, Selective Disruption of the Cerebral

Neocortex in Alzheimer's Disease, the Alzheimer's Disease

Neuroimaging Initiative

(22) Cooney, R.E.; et al. (2010). "Neural correlates of rumination in

depression". Cognitive Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience 10 (4):

470478.

(23) M. J. Kempton et al., 2011, Structural Neuroimaging Studies in

Major Depressive Disorder, Meta-analysis and Comparison With

Bipolar Disorder Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(7):675-690.

doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.60

225

(24) Su B, Wang X, Nunomura A, et al. (December 2008). "Oxidative

Stress Signaling in Alzheimer's Disease". Curr Alzheimer Res 5 (6):

52532.

(25) Magda Ilcewicz-Klimek, Christopher R Honey, Helen S Mayberg

(2011-11-18). "A multicenter pilot study of subcallosal cingulate area

deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression". Journal

of Neurosurgery 116 (2): 31522. doi:10.3171/2011.10.JNS102122.

PMID 22098195

(26) Aha. Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the

right hemisphere EDWARD M. BOWDEN and MARK JUNG-BEQGAAN

(27) Fingelkurts AA, Fingelkurts AA, Rytsl H, Suominen K, Isomets

E, Khknen S, Impaired functional connectivity at EEG alpha and

theta frequency bands in major depression, BM-SCIENCE - Brain and

Mind Technologies Research Centre, Espoo, Finland.

226

Paper 2: The Neural Correlates of Linear and Nonlinear Thinking

Abstract:

The highly developed Frontal Executive Network (FEN) of the human

brain has long been recognized as the "seat of cognition" but ideas

as to how it works were hard to come by. The division of the FEN into

two different areas, area 1 and area 2, which handle two types of

thinking, was reviewed. It is evident that area 1 is relatively

"dendritic", while area 2 is relatively "Axonic". By this and other clues

such as the Axon's relationship with Norepi, Norepi's novelty-

detecting nature, and area 2's comparison with the cerebellum etc.

a preliminary theory of the methods of working of these two areas is

proposed. It is proposed that the two areas handle linear and non-

linear thinking respectively. This theoretically solves the mystery of

the "System 1 and System 2" associated with current dual system

theories of cognition, which say that there are two different cognitive

systems in brains.

Though we may take it for granted that there is only one common

mental process the idea that there is a relatively qualitative logical

process and a different, relatively quantitative basic perceptive

process112 is not new though it may have only a fringe following.

Thus the relatively unknown Wilfrid Sellars of USA criticized his

more famous countryman Lewiss Kantian pragmatism or Carnaps

positivism, for claiming that perceived knowledge is independent of

the conceptual processes which result in perception. In 1956, Sellars

wrote: I presume that no philosopher who has attacked the idea of

givenness or, to use the Hegelian term, immediacy will deny that

there is a difference between inferring that something is the case,

and, for example, seeing it to be the case... Many things have been

said to be "given": sense contents, material objects, universals,

propositions, real connections, first principles, even givenness itself.

The falsehood of The Given is the apparent-to-a-few, but mostly-

under-appreciated illogicality of a complex objects necessarily cursory

immediate appraisal (The Given), which the basic associative process

a bit too overconfidently perceives. As Sellars says about such

insubstantial appearances, one can deny that there are "data" or that

anything is, in this sense, "given" without flying in the face of

reason.

112 Which works with beliefs; and we can call it empirical associative/syllogical process.

227

This idea of a difference between a certain basic thinking system,

which swiftly prances in the trivial world of the Givens, and the other

system which discriminatingly analyses, predates 1956, being known

to the untold number of older thinkers who have attacked the idea of

the Given (i.e. the Kantian notion of "sufficiency of the basic associative

process").

Indeed theories regarding Dual systems of cognition are not new

they are, rather, at the heart of psychology, even the reason for its

existence. As Evans of Plymouth notes, research must be about a first

system that works with beliefs... and a second system that works with

logic.

Jonathan Evans (9) is quoted: Theories positing dual cognitive

systems have become popular in cognitive and social psychology.

Although these theories have a lot of common features, inspection of

the literature reveals a number of difficult and unresolved theoretical

issues".

Following up on paper 1 about how Dopamine and Norepi are

biochemical rivals central to nervous system function, and are

associated with dendrites and axons respectively, this thesis

attempts to resolve some of the most important of these theoretical

issues.

Evans says: "The paradigm case in dual-process theories of reasoning

is belief bias [a typical tendency to prefer basic association of beliefs

over logic i.e. advanced associative process] In this method (Evans et

al., 1983; Klauer et al., 2000) participants are given arguments to

evaluate, whose conclusions either follow or do not follow logically,

and are either consistent or inconsistent with belief. Research

repeatedly shows that both logic and belief significantly affect

decisions made, but the two seem to be in conflict within individuals.

Noting that popular accounts (like Kahneman's book Thinking Fast

and Slow) describe the elusive neural systems as System 1 (the

belief-bias i.e. syllogical system) and System 2 (the logical system),

Evans adds: While belief-bias processes do have the characteristics

typically ascribed to System 1 (fast, parallel, automatic), they

are certainly not ancient. Nor are they shared with animals that lack

a belief system. Thus, while some biases may be attributed to

mismatch between the function of evolutionarily old cognitive

systems and the current worlds much changed environment

(Stanovich, 2004), we need a different account for others including

belief biases".

228

System 1 (aka syllogical faculty, which has been called "logical", and

even "scientific", but it is about purely empirical, not deductive

association of beliefs) and System 2 (logical skill, or more precisely,

deductive logical skill which dysfunctions in the Nonverbal Learning

Disabled) are both uniquely human, but some have better developed

System 1, while others (Aspergians) have better developed System 2,

as we'll see.

The Frontal Executive Network

The Frontal Executive Network (FEN) has long been recognized as

the uniquely human seat of cognition: The frontal lobes are more

developed in humans than other animals. There is no other part of

the brain where lesions can cause such a wide variety of symptoms"

(1).

J. D. Chick and P. De Witte: "The importance of the frontal lobes

derives from rich connections with almost all other parts of the

central nervous system. The FEN, being most fundamental in the

"systems of thinking" context, can be called the brain's psychological

nucleus.

Scholars have found that it pulls relevant data from posterior brain

areas for purpose of associative thinking. However, little beyond this

idea is known.

Burgess quotes Rabbitt on the enigma of the FEN: Attempts to define

executive function encounter an identical difficulty: no single

exemplary task or even subset of tasks provides an adequate

ostensive definition. It is often necessary to fall back on consensus

definitions drawn from the common sense of the man in the street

or the collective wisdom of distinguished experts in the field...these

tend to be wide-ranging catalogues of examples of intelligent

behaviour and avoid entirely discussions of underlying process (2).

This paper presents a preliminary investigation of the underlying

process.

2 types of thoughts were found to exist in the FEN (aka "Medial

Rostral PFC"/MPFC), so that it has been split into two components,

rostral and caudal:

Gilbert et al.: "Activation peaks from studies involving mentalizing

and self-reflection tasks were significantly caudal to those from

studies involving other tasks. Conversely, activation peaks from

studies involving multiple-task co-ordination were significantly

229

rostral to those from other studies" (3). "Mentalizing"113, that is,

reflecting on mental states is the manner of contemplating

others'/self's mental states, in which the (caudal) MPFC was found to

have a role (4). On the other hand, in multiple-task co-ordination,

which is a type of multi-object contemplation the rostral MPFC has

a role.

Another proof of this demarcation of the MPFC into two different

parts according to the different types of thoughts occurring in these

parts, from Hiram Brownell et al.s experiment. Rita Carter (15)

summarizes the experiment: 2 stories were asked. The first story

tested Theory of Mind ("mentalizing"). The second tested multi-

object contemplation ability. The question relating to the first story

was:

Why did the burglar give up? which required one to think about the

burglar's mind; while the question relating to the second story was:

why did the alarm go off?, which required multi-object contemplation

about a system of objects.

Rita Carter: Answering the first question required ideas regarding

the burglars mind. The scans showed that normal persons used quite

separate regions of their brain to work out each answer. The first

113 See diagram attached to table 1, paper 1, for an idea of what verbal mentalizing is.

230

question, that called for calculation of a persons mental state, used a

spot in the middle of the prefrontal cortex one of the most 'evolved'

parts of the brain [orange/1]. Working out the question related to

the second story used another spot beneath it (marked 2/yellow;

the experiment found that Aspergians used area 2 even to solve the

first story's answer! This means that Aspergians tend to use the NLT-

area).

These results were more or less confirmed by the neuroimaging

studies of Gilbert et al. (3), who say "Neuroimaging data revealed

adjacent but clearly distinct regions of activation within MPFC

related to (i) mentalizing vs. non-mentalizing conditions [red/A] and

(ii) SO vs SI attention [multi-object contemplation]" [green/B]. Thus,

clearly, the FEN has 2 components the upper area handles

mentalizing (and other processes), the lower area handles thinking of

objects!

The next part of this thesis will show that the upper, mentalizing-

related part of the FEN/MPFC can be called Linear-Thinking area

(LT-area), whereas the lower objective/multi-object-contemplation

part of the FEN/MPFC can be called Nonlinear-Thinking area (NLT-

area)... The MPFC, or, to use the other word, "BA10" has been

described as "one of the least well understood regions of the human

brain".

231

During human evolution, this area expanded relative to the rest of

the brain. Expansion of both NLT-area and LT-area occurred as part

of human evolution.

Note the dendritic attribute of the LT-area:

It [LT-area] is also unusual in that its neurons have particularly

extensive dendrital arborisation.

(Definitions of the terms Axonic and dendritic a

neuron with more higher order dendrital elaboration

and axonal development (myelination, branching) is

called Axonic and if it has more lower order

dendrital elaboration (branching/arborisation), it is

called dendritic).

Area 10 [LT-area] in humans has the lowest neuron density among

primate brains.

Thus LT-area neurons have much more dendrital development;

neuron density is low; in other words, there are low number of axons

(as only one axon per neuron) and profuse dendritic branching in the

LT-area. The NLT-area, in contrast, has higher neuron density, with

lesser dendrital arborisation. We can represent our understanding as

a rough diagram:

232

The theory of two types of associative thinking

In the context of above diagram, the diagrammatic statement of the

main Theory of two types of thinking (nonlinear thinking and linear

thinking), is:

Scientists confirmed that dendrites store data about objects (which

can be assumptions or more robust data). In both NLT-area and LT-

area, neurons are emulating reality (storing object representative

data aka object models), for purpose of associative thinking. Models

are not corresponding to reality they are merely representations of

reality.

233

The process of associative thinking presumably rejects models

which do not fit the kernel of apparent truths, which can be called the

mind's worldview.

Before this associative process begins, the system does not know

which models are true.

The theory of two types of associative thinking states that there are 2

different types of associative thinking in brains the first, the LT-

area's dendritic associative process, that is purely empirical, and the

other the NLT-area's axonic associative process, which has more to

do with novel insight of non-empirical nature. In the NLT-area

(where models are stored in neurons 1 to 7, for example): Due to more

axons or more neurons per unit volume, the system emphasizes

contemplation of many models (ability to store more models rather

than more detailed models, allows ability to weigh more models in

contemplation). The NLT-area is about several models; the LT-area is

about fewer but more elaborate or detailed models former is the

scientific/logical method (in the philosophy of science, considering as

many models as possible is most scientifically sound (Lakatos et al.

(23)). The architecture of the LT-Area supports the contemplation of

a few, extensively defined, and less reliable object models (which can

be called less object-oriented) rather than as many models as are

needed for logical contemplation. Therefore the focus of the LT-area

is not on deductive contemplation, but on communication and the

dendritic associative process (whose "paradigm case" is the syllogical

process).

Dendrites are associated with Dopamine and Axons are associated

with Norepi/Norepic processing, as per paper 1. That implies: the

Axonic (meta-) NLT-area is associated with more Norepic processing

than Dopaminic processing. Let us now study only the Norepic aspect

of the NLT-area.

Nonlinear thinking The Norepic data processing associated

with the relatively Axonic NLT-area (more common in logicians)

234

The NLT-area's deductive logic process can be analogized to the lock-

picking process.

Norepic processing is numerous studies have shown associated

with contextual selection of an "eye-catching" datum, exactly as seen

in the above diagram.

235

Norepi's processing is of this particular eye-catching data involving

type:

a. The P300, the Norepi-related cortical event, responds to

environmental stimuli having behaviorally relevant,

motivational, or attention grabbing properties (18, 19, 20).

b. The P300 is usually elicited using the oddball paradigm, in

which low-probability target items are mixed with high-

probability non-target (or "standard") items (21).

c. Devauges et al. found Cortical [Norepi] release can increase

the alteration detection rate (number of times an alteration

was selected) in multiple-cue probability learning (6).

d. A. J. Yu et al. developed a Bayesian framework to examine NE

release in instances of "unexpected uncertainty," where a

drastic alteration in sensory information produces a large

disparity between expectations and what actually occurs. The

model predicts that NE levels spike when the predictive

context is switched, then subside. It was shown that lesions of

the LC impair this attentional shift (i.e. shifting attention to

novel data) (7).

e. Chris Chatham: McClure et al. suggest that the anterior

cingulate cortex (ACC) may direct release of Noradrenaline in

the LC. ACC is sensitive to conflict (i.e. if there are multiple

competing stimuli or responses).

Thus the (mind's) eye-catching datum is selected, and becomes the

subject of the output in the QGA this is how axonal processing (in

the meta-NLT-area) works.

The detection of the most novel data causes either of the 3 types of

output or operations on NLT-area data: Elimination of eye-catching

data, modification of eye-catching data, or Traction i.e. summoning of

related data.

Now let us see how the dendrital processing in the LT-area-linked

relatively dendritic circuit, differs. Again, axons are associated with

Norepi, dendrites are associated with Dopamine and dendrital

processing, as per paper 1. That implies: the LT-area-linked relatively

dendritic circuit is associated with more Dopaminic processing than

Norepic processing. That is to say, Axonal/Norepic processing is not

absent it is merely less in the LT-area-linked dendritic circuit.

However, we will study only the Dopaminic/dendritic aspect of the

meta-LT-area.

236

Linear thinking: The Dopaminic data processing associated with

the relatively dendritic LT-area (more common in syllogicians)

237

Above are Purkinje Cells from the ancient cerebellum First we

notice that theyre highly dendritic. In that, the cerebellum resembles

the (meta) LT-area.

Statement:

a) There are two types of associative processes, the (rearranged-as-per-

formerly-known-pattern-data-returning as we shall be proving now)

dendrital associative process associated with Dopamine and

dendrites... and the eye-catching-in-formerly-unknown, detected-pattern-data-

returning axonal associative process associated with Norepi and

Axons.

b) Extensive dendrital arborisation is not common, being found only

in a few neurostructures such as the cerebellum and the LT-area. One

can speculate that insight into the dendritic meta-LT-area's style of

processing, can be gained by an examination of the cerebellum's style

of processing.

The cerebellum receives input from sensory systems of the spinal

cord and other brain areas, and integrates these inputs to fine-tune

motor activity. E.g.: ensuring you dont step on your right foot with

the left; thus a standard test of cerebellar function is to reach with

the fingertip for a target: The Healthy person will move the finger in

a rapid straight trajectory, while a person with cerebellar damage

reaches slowly and erratically, with many mid-course corrections.

The output from the cerebellum (where body parts should be) can be

called a basic rearrangement of input (where body parts are)/innate

data (ought to be).

238

The dendrital associative process seems to involve a sort of

comparison of to-be-arranged data with either pre-existing data or

pre-defined formats (that conforms to the idea of D's monoconditional

signalling!). The theory that the dendrital associative process involves

a type of rearrangement/homogenization of data, is confirmed in an

example which covers (undoubtedly) the LT-area (Aspergians seem

worse at jumbled words in general): Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an

Elingsh uinervtisy (16), it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in

a wrod are, olny taht the frist and lsat ltteres are at the rghit pcleas.

The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a

porbelm. What actually occurs when we look at, say, lteter? Surely

we can say only that (in a dendrital process) the input data was

compared with innate data (memory of "letter"), and output (mental

contemplation of "letter") was found; it was, thus, a rearrangement of

lteter. This is not so different from what happens in the cerebellum, if

one thinks about it!

Thus we theorize that, in cerebellum-like dendritic systems, circuits

with high quantity of data (where is foot, what is terrain like etc.)

carry out an associative process which takes into account many

sensorily intaken as well as non-intaken, innate data but it involves

no deduction. The input data, as well as the output data, can be

described as quantitative; the processing seems to involve more the

monoconditional signalling which is indeed linked to D, than N's

multiconditional signalling. Therefore, as the example of cerebellum

shows, the dendritic system's output is about homogenizing or

rearranging input data into internal coherence, not insight/unknown

logical output as shown below that kind of processing is handled by

the NLT-area.

Of course verbal go-around/thumb-rules can compensate for the lack

of insight one can say, "whenever the tree bends to one side, wind is

blowing towards that side" and use it as a general law... yet that policy

has its limitations.

239

The LT-area process, being non-deductive, can be called a largely

dendrital associative process. Transplanting this idea from the

cerebellum into the similarly dendritic LT-area, gives insight into the

LT-area process...

A semantic example of dendrital processing is how verbs are

processed (run becomes running etc.), or arranged grammatically.

Or in its highest case, syllogical faculty reduced to outputs which

are coherent with respect to Givens ("knowns" and "seens") even if

not necessarily logical.

Syllogical faculty, as in the NLD patient in whom right hemisphere

dysfunction is noted surely involves maximum development of the

LT-area, because of how the right brain hemisphere is Axonic (see

last footnote), thus Right Hemisphere dysfunction means a generally

dendritic brain, which implies a higher development of the dendritic

LT-area.

Thus we can state:

240

Thus the basic associative process is purely empirical, no insight into

patterns is involved.

The same empirical association of data, or dendrital associative

process, is discussed by Burgess et al. (17): "MPFC [LT-area] lesions

disproportionately impair performance in ill-structured situations

(e.g. Burgess et al. 2001; Goel & Grafman, 2000; Grafman, 2002). In

other words where the optimal way of behaving is not precisely

signaled by the situation, so one has to impose ones own structure.

Rostral PFC seems most involved in situations for which there is no

well-rehearsed or well-specified way of behaving, and therefore

behavioral organization needs to be self-determined. Burgess

discusses quantitative deduction, which is dependent on the LT-area;

that has an empirical nature, and is different from qualitative

deduction, that is, the NLT-area's process of insight (the true meaning

of logic).

The LT-area "seems most involved in situations for which there is no

well-rehearsed or well-specified way of behaving, and behavioural

organization needs to be self-determined" This reminds us of the

Aspergian's liking for a routine according to which their tasks should

be done, and their unease with unpredictable situations; e.g.:

Aspergian Schizoids are bad at improvisational conversation. Burgess

et al. note that [LT-area] impairment led to a tardiness and

disorganization [Autistic character traits], the severity of which

ensured that despite his intact intellect and social skills [certain

higher social skills are processed in the NLT-area], he never managed

to return to work like before. It explains why Aspergians are worse

at chaotic quantitative empirical activities like official algorithms, or

why Aspergians care more deeply about reform (which makes the

system efficient, thus unnecessary things need not be quantitatively

done).

Dopaminic processing, i.e. simple rearrangement of input data and

comparison with innate data occurs in games like crossword, chess,

jumbled words, and so forth; that is why Aspergians are bad at such

games, or why these games occur in the newspapers circulated by the

syllogicians.

An example of complex QRR modulators: Given the many details one

knows regarding many people what to do? All these details are

arranged for a result (e.g.: intimidate/please etc.). Such are the

"situations for which there is no well-rehearsed or well-specified way

of behaving, and therefore behavioural organization needs to be self-

determined".

241

Such data rearranging neurostructures QRR modulators which

correspond to "instincts" constitute a "primal logic, which, though

often complex, is part of the Receptive System, and involves hard-set

dopaminic neural organs. QRR-Ms, which seem to be largely in the

PFC (which gets stricken in case of AD) can result in complex

behaviours, depending on the intricate arrangement of Dopaminic

monoconditional signalling checkposts but it is different from the

process of insight. As such, people high in such talents (street

smartness, communicative abilities, charisma etc.) can be called high

RQ (Receptive Quotient) type humans (Syllogician Schizoids). Such

LT-area processing is nevertheless a type of intelligence, useful in the

practice of doctors, pilots, editors, and many other professionals.

Another example of QRR-Modulators: In the documentary "Street

Thief", the thief has expertise in social engineering, stalking, and

intelligence gathering, and discusses careful, meticulous planning

cycles.

Until now we've seen 2 types of processing, Norepic/axonal and

dopaminic/dendrital processing. It is not right to say that the NLT-

area has only the former and LT-area has only the latter rather,

NLT-area has more of the former, and the LT-area has more of the

latter.

Thus we demarcate between 2 forms of associative thinking:

A. LT-area associative thinking, whose main aspect is belief-

bias-based aka syllogical faculty.

B. NLT-area associative thinking, whose main aspect is logical

talent.

Evans says: Research repeatedly shows that both logic and belief

significantly affect decisions made, but the two seem to be in conflict

within individuals (9).

Evidently, then, there are 2 systems in any brain, one working with

logic and the other with beliefs; in some people known as logicians

(e.g.: the senators of Rome) the NLT-area-linked logical system is

predominant; the LT-area-linked syllogical system is predominant in

syllogicians (examples of them are the Greek sophists or the prefects

of Rome).

242

Left Brain, Right Brain

The axonic NLT-area largely interacts with memories stored in

Axonic sites the dendritic LT-area largely interacts with memories

stored in dendritic sites. Now, the right brain is relatively axonic114,

hence most of the Axonic memories are stored in the right brain, thus

the logical system should involve more the right hemisphere. And

indeed, Bowden et al. (14) note that the right brain hemisphere is

associated with the Aha! Insight experience which is nothing but

the logical process.

St. George et al. (12) note that the right brain is making sense of what

is: The brain areas involved in discourse processing were scanned by

fMRI ... substantially more right hemisphere activation for untitled than

for titled paragraphs.

The dendritic left brain, in contrast, just believes a title that claims to

be representative of the passage which is the word-based

modeling of reality, which centrally defines syllogical skill's nature.

The dendritic left brain is again pinpointed as the residence of

syllogical reasoning by Gwen L. Schmidt et al. (13), who say: Right

hemisphere role in unfamiliar sentences containing distant semantic

relationships [logical relationships]". A left hemisphere role in

"familiar sentences containing close semantic relationships

[syllogical relationships]. More work was done by Gazzaniga et al.,

who show that, though it does not handle the finer points, the right

brain can tell what is what... Which is why logicians/senators must

be heard; a civilization without objective logic-guarding senators is

like a brain without axonic development (i.e., the depressed brain)...

114 Chris Chatham summarizes the research on the dendritic left hemisphere: The left

hemisphere has larger dendritic branching than the right, at large distances from the

dendrites main shaft; the opposite trend holds at distances closer to the main dendrite.

243

The problem with an overly dendritic neural doctrine

"Aristotle and Galen did not consider the cerebellum truly part of the

brain: They called it the parencephalon ("same-as-brain"), as opposed

to the encephalon or brain proper. Bower argues that it is a sensory

organ hyper-receptive, thus unlike the rest of the brain, which is a

generative bastion of Norepi.

Is the syllogician's LT-area/FEN's progress towards a cerebellum-

like, sponge-like dendritic structure a problem rather than a

progress? It certainly seems a medical emergency given Fingelkurts'

assertion that the depressed brain is less specialized (more gray

matter-oriented, more dendritic). We can study an extinct hominid,

the homo floresiensis (HF), to settle the issue. Though it is indeed

said that the LT-area expanded as man evolved it is notable that, in

the HF, BA10 (the LT-area) is even larger than in men! Notably, it was

accompanied by a general shrinkage of the brain (microcephaly)

though HF was advanced (as a derivative of homo erectus), its brain

became smaller than that of the chimpanzee! Indeed the HF became

extinct because of its overdependence on the LT-area. Thus HF is a

closed model proving that increase of syllogical faculty is an anti-

brain trend (indeed, hyper-RS is hypo-GS), so that it shrinks the brain

as a whole. It appears that defects in the process of artificial selection

should be blamed for the evolution of either the HF, or increased LT-

area strength in syllogicians; again proves how estranged from nature

man is!

244

~~~References~~~

(1) Kolb, B. and Whishaw, I. Q. (1990). Fundamentals of Human

Neuropsychology, chapter 21. Memory, W. H. Freeman and Company,

third edition.

(2) Rabbitt, Patrick (1997) (ed). Methodology of frontal and

executive function Hove UK: Psychology Press

(3) Sam J. Gilbert et al., 2007, Distinct regions of medial rostral

prefrontal cortex supporting social and nonsocial functions, Soc Cogn

Affect Neurosci. 2007 September; 2(3): 217226.

(4) Frith U, Frith CD. 2003, Development and neurophysiology of

mentalizing, Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Mar 29;

358(1431):459-73.

(6) Devauges V, Sara SJ, Activation of the noradrenergic system

facilitates an attentional shift in the rat. Behav. Brain Res., 1990 Jun

18;39(1):1928.

(7) Yu, A. J.; Dayan, P. (2005). "Uncertainty, neuromodulation, and

attention". Neuron 46 (4): 68192.

doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.04.026. PMID

(8) Nicholas Humphrey, Introduction to Consciousness Regained,

1983, Oxford University Press

(9) Evans, J. St. B. T.; Barston, J. L. & Pollard, P. (1983). "On the

conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning". Memory

and Cognition 11 (3): 285306

Klauer, K.C.; J. Musch, B. Naumer (2000). "On belief bias in syllogistic

reasoning". Psychological Review 107 (4): 852884.

(10) Evans,, J. St. B. T; Curtis-Holmes, J. (2005). "Rapid responding

increases belief bias: Evidence for the dual-process theory of

reasoning.". Thinking and Reasoning 11 (4): 382389

(11) Bob Jacobs, Matthew Schall, and Arnold B. Scheibel, A

Quantitative Dendritic Analysis of Wernicke's Area in Humans. 11.

Gender, Hemispheric, and Environmental Factors

(12) St George M, Kutas M, Martinez A, Sereno MI, Semantic

integration in reading: engagement of the right hemisphere during

discourse processing

(13) Gwen L. Schmidt, Casey J. DeBuse, Carol A. Seger, Right

hemisphere metaphor processing? Characterizing the lateralization

245

of semantic processes, , Department of Psychology, Colorado State

University

(14) Bowden, Edward M.; Jung-Beeman, Mark (1 September 2003).

"Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in the

right hemisphere". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10 (3): 730737.

doi:10.3758/BF03196539

(15) Mapping the Mind, Rita Carter, Christopher D. Frith

(16) The Significance of Letter Position in Word Recognition PhD

Thesis, 1976, Nottingham University, by Graham Rawlinson

(17) Burgess, P. W., Veitch, E., & Costello, A. (submitted). The role of

the right rostral prefrontal cortex in multitasking: The six element

test.

(18) Johnson, R.; Jr (1993). "On the neural generators of the P300

component of the event-related potential". Psychophysiology 30 (1):

9097. PMID 8416066.

(19) Pineda, J.A.; Foote, S.L.; Neville, H.J. (1989). "Effects of Locus

Coeruleus Lesions on Auditory Event-Related Potentials in Monkey".

J. Neurosci 9 (1): 8193. PMID 2563282.

(20) Swick, D., Pineda, J. a, Schacher, S., & Foote, S. L. (1994). Locus

coeruleus neuronal activity in awake monkeys: relationship to

auditory P300-like potentials and spontaneous EEG. Experimental

brain research. Experimentelle Hirnforschung. Exprimentation

crbrale, 101(1), 8692.

Duncan-Johnson, C.C.; Donchin, E. (1977). "On quantifying surprise:

The variation of event-related potentials with subjective probability".

Psychophysiology 14 (5): 456467.

(21) Squires NK, Squires KC, Hillyard SA. (1975). Two varieties of

long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory

stimuli in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 38(4):387-

401. PMID 46819

(22) Behrendt RP, Hippocampus and consciousness, 2013

(23) Lakatos (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research

Programmes: Philosophical Papers Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press