Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
this model of the human neural circuits doesn't seem to be universal as some of the more primitive circuits seem to be more prevalent in U.S.A. Christian fundamentalists, and USA'ers in general.

how does he explain that?

by zoe on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 07:28:39 AM EST
Well clearly we're genetically inferior.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 07:56:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was thinking that the model required some modification in terms of effect from the living environment on the levels of the circuits.  
by zoe on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 08:02:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I really do recommend reading the whole book, but here's a quote related to your query:

The second circuit, the emotional-territorial networks of the
brain, is concerned entirely with power politics. This "patriotic"
circuit is built into all vertebrates and is perhaps 500 million to
1000 million years old. In the modern human it seems to be
centralized in the thalamus--the "back brain" or "old brain" and
is linked with the voluntary nervous system and the muscles.
This circuit appears in each newborn when the DNA master
tape sends out RNA messenger molecules to trigger the mutation
from neonate to "toddler," which involves first of all standing
erect. Walking, mastering gravity, overcoming physical obstacles
and learning to manipulate others politically are the vulnerable
points at which imprinting and heavy conditioning occur. The
muscles that perform these power functions are quickly programmed
with what become chronic, life-long reflexes.
Depending as always [on] the accidents of the environment--what
happens at points of neurological vulnerability--this circuit will
organize itself into a strong, dominating role in the pack (or
family) or a weak, submissive role. Without going into the
jungles with the ethologists, one can observe this mammalian
imprinting process in any litter of puppies. It is very quickly
determined who is TOP DOG and who is BOTTOM DOG.

(emphases in the original)



Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.
by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 08:22:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't know about genetics but Americans sure have been dumbed down since the Eisenhower days, and they've accepted it; it probably has to do with the advent of television and its deterioration. But America within a period of thirty years has lived two major political mistakes and then repeated them. I refer to Vietnam-Iraq  and Nixon-Bush. Maybe we're short in that part of the brain having to do with memory.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:20:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
amnesia or Alzheimer's?
by zoe on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:46:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Indoctrination AND education are both up. By an enormous margin in both cases. Similar pressures causing both apply to the whole industrialized world.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 12:54:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Someone said, the first time the history appears as tragedy, the second time it appears as farce.

The history implanted a Nixon-Nam circuit in the US collective psychology, it seems.

by das monde on Tue Jul 24th, 2007 at 09:27:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Imprinting means that you're more likely to prefer to use one circuit over another.

I think it's more of a loose metaphor than an accurate model. I don't think it's necessarily linear, and you get some fine examples of kookiness and paranoia when people don't imprint the higher circuits usefully.

But I also think you need either wacky brain chemistry or living examples of people who can take you to higher brain circuits. If your environment doesn't support that, you'll grow up crippled.

It's a bit like Chinese foot binding, but cultural.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 08:16:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"But I also think you need either wacky brain chemistry or living examples of people who can take you to higher brain circuits. If your environment doesn't support that, you'll grow up crippled."
The mind altering drugs of the 60's and 70's performed that function. That's why they were hated by Republicans- they hate all kinds of freedom.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:04:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I hear this argument from the most closed-minded drug users.  If their minds were closed before and opened after their drug use, I am terrified for the future of the planet.  
by zoe on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:11:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There was a lot of people fooling themselves about their "spiritual evolution" back then.  If you'll recall most of the gurus from that era have been shown to be hucksters, cheats, liars, sexual predators, or/and nincompoops.  Which is not unexpected from a bunch of religiously indoctrinated know-nothings.

Taking LSD does have a certain Wow, Man utility.  It informs the taker perception and one's psycho-epistemology are programmable, if the taker is open to such notions.  My suspicion is most people who took LSD were more interested in watching the pretty colors.  To my certain knowledge, people who took a lot of LSD fried their brains.

It's worth noting the advice Maslow used to give when asked about how to achieve a state of Self-Actualization, "Get a job."

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:34:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was responding to TBG's reference to "cripples." You were probably not a "cripple," so on this topic, it's hard for us to converse.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:49:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ring the bell and ATinNM salivates.  :-)

Too many encounters with individuals claiming all one needs for obtaining "higher states of consciousness" - whatever that means - is a pill.

Sorry.

 

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:31:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd agree up to a point. Drugs are a cheat if you want to live in the higher circuits. You get a day ticket, not a residence permit, and you also see some of the seedier parts. The real thing seems cleaner and more reliable, which also makes it very rare and much harder to achieve.

But the idea that you could rearrange and revalue the world in a different way was very powerful in its own right.

The conservatives really did hate that possibility. While they make a lot of noise about freedom they're utterly devoted to top-down control in practice, and there was mass panic when society seemed to be getting away from them in the 60s.

We'll probably have another wave of change in a decade or three, and might get a bit further ahead then.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 01:23:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I wasn't speaking of achieving "higher states of consciousness" through using drugs. I don't know if you can understand me but I was thinking of drugs aiding in removing blockages to reaching another level, particularly #4, the adult stage. It seems to me that "crippled" people have difficulty to reach that stage.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 02:12:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series