Article: brain's 'stopping' mechanism can be triggered by sounds to derail your train of thought

Article: brain's 'stopping' mechanism can be triggered by sounds to derail your train of thought

When a brain is working on anything, such as thought, it is assembling information together by way of dopamine allocation. A brain has a limited amount of dopamine available for allocation, and when another process is introduced, with a greater

for all things there is an ordering of considerations, and when another process is introduced, with a greater priority, dopamine will first be allocated towards it. If there isn't enough dopamine to be allocated to both the thinking that was previously happening, and the processing of the newly-introduced but higher-precedence task, such as heard sounds, then dopamine will cease being allocated to the thought-process, and its process will be dropped, as I just explained in this post:

"And at other times, a signal for which there isn't sufficient dopamine to keep it connected with its parental signal processes can be dropped, and this is what is the cause of ADD / ADHD"

Also, the reason why the sound would cause the thought-process to drop is the same reason why people with Autism sometimes experience sensitivity to audio, and as I also just explained in the same previous post:

"In other situations, there is a lack of dopamine to regulate a signal properly at synapses, but the signal is still being pulled along its path routing with great force, as the signal is synced to many other signals, which create a value to its force which overpowers the resistance it experiences at synapses - and this is what is behind sensitivity to audio and other senses"

Reason often causes incoming sensory information to be pulled through a brain with greater priority than conditional information, such as controlled thought, and so dopamine allocation is given to the greater reality, which is the real audio and sensory information. This can be overcome, if a person's mind is fully considered into their control, but a lot of people's minds are subject to their environment.

If dopamine is increased enough (while adrenaline / noradrenaline is kept from increasing), thought-processes will not drop due to environmental sensations and added information sources. And if dopamine availability is pushed high enough in a brain, that person can even sort multiple subjects independently of one another within their brain - say, even 5 completely different things can be worked on at once, all receiving an attention that is equal to a person's normal complete attention, when it is focused on a single thing and with no distractions.

It's just dopamine.

The article also says:

"The findings could provide insight into neurological conditions such as Parkinson's, where the body's signals for movement can become disrupted, leading to trembling muscles and slowed movements."

This happens with Parkinson's because the person's brain frays over time due to having been dopamine deficient for so long, and eventually there isn't enough dopamine to handle all the individual micro-processes that have broken from their original ones as signals were pulled along pathways while there was insufficient dopamine to handle them. Eventually, there isn't enough dopamine to even hold simple processes together, and they keep being disrupted, like a lot of micro instances of ADD within the brain.



Why dopamine deficiency hits some people in some ways, and other people in other ways is because "for all things there is an ordering of considerations". Mental stress emerges in different people due to different causes, afflicting different processes with them, and getting locked into, and possibly branching from those processes. And different people focus on different things within their mind. All things factor into how dopamine deficiency will be expressed within a person.



The article also says:

"The team believe that the same stopping mechanism could even offer a possible explanation for attention deficit disorders"

ADD is caused by signal-dropping due to insufficient dopamine to connect working information to its parent processes, as the parent processes are pulled through a person's brain. The stopping "mechanism" is a lack of dopamine availability. And, yeah, it explains both Parkinson's and ADD.

Shrapnel

A Crash-Course in the Basics for Truth-Based Human Health Treatment

Dopamine, serotonin, adrenaline, opioids, cannabinoid receptors, GHB receptors... from the day a human is born, even for one that's in their mother's womb, their brain is an ongoing drug bath. And all human experience and productivity are achieved and expressed through the manipulation of drug levels in a person's brain.

i.

Some most basic understanding that is essential for a person to be capable of compassionately and successfully treating people of their stress / dopamine deficiency ailments is as follows:

a)

Dopamine is the means by which a brain does all the work that is considering, which is the work by which a brain and its person develops, learns, memorizes, recalls, decides, etc, and is work that the rest of the body's health is subject to. A person's potential and successes are subject to their brain's access to released and available dopamine:

- Work is only possible for a person and brain in an environment of having enough dopamine for it, and dopamine levels are what form a person's head-room for their work potential: More dopamine equates to a greater work potential, while less dopamine equates to less work potential.

- The weight of any body of work, and the effort required for it from a particular person, is entirely relative to the amount of released dopamine which a person has within themselves: It is possible for something which has a work weight value of +5 to a person of high dopamine availability, to have a work weight value of +500, or greater, to a person of low dopamine availability.

- Lower dopamine means that a brain isn't able to connect as much information at one time, and must address work in piecemeal, rather than in its entirety at once, or using larger concepts.

- Lower dopamine exposes a person's brain and body to greater affliction by keeping the brain in a continuous state of trying to catch up on work, without allowing it reach resolution of work so that it could implement the meaning of its resolutions in ways which create solid foundations for the mental and physical environment, and fortify them against detected vulnerabilities.

- Also, lower dopamine means that a brain isn't able to access larger concepts, such as the concept of a particular objective. Concepts are formed by connecting considerations, and that connecting is reliant on dopamine availability. The more dopamine that can be allocated, the greater number of considerations can be held in positive connection, and worked with simultaneously.

This means that a person's capability to overcome matters, such as emotional, mental, and physical, is relative to the released and available dopamine which they have in their brain. What seems a straight-forward and easily doable matter to a dopamine-plentiful person can appear like an insurmountable mountain to a person with low dopamine availability. And what is easy and straight-forward for a person with lots of dopamine availability is extremely more difficult, and less certain, even impossible, for a person with notably less dopamine availability.


A lot of people with high dopamine availability misjudge their worth by basing their assessment on outward appearance of their accomplishments and productivity relative to the general populace, without ever being aware that many of the people they judge as least motivated, productive, and ambitious, are exerting greater than 50x the effort each day, while accomplishing very little, compared to many of the people who are the greatest achievers by outward appearance. 

And those who are greater achievers are such only by way of having greater dopamine released within their brains, which many of them have precisely because they are less willing to consider fairly and truthfully, but instead make determinations which cater to their pre-existing prejudices, and which serve to establish 'reward' for themselves.

Having the dopamine for work makes it possible, easier, and desirable to accomplish more. Often, a person's sense of visible accomplishment causes them to feel more entitled to good things than those who accomplish little in the eyes of society. They do this because they sought to justify themselves by their determinations - but no one is justified by their determinations, and rather are justified or non-justified according to the consideration by which their works are done, in the sight of all truth.

As said by Jesus: "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has given more than all the others who are making contributions. For they gave a tiny part of their surplus, but she, poor as she is, has given everything she had to live on."

So it is often the case between those who accomplish visibly little, and those who achieve many things for themselves. And many who are doctors, scientists, entrepreneurs, etc, are in fact the most lazy, self-justifying, and entitled-feeling in all society.

b)

“Sober” is a context-dependent term, and ultimately there is no such thing as a sober human being, because all human experience and exertion is manifested through the constant manipulation of all the things which both legal and criminalized drugs equally manipulate within every human's brain. Human life is a drug-fuelled experience, and the only truly sober human is a dead human.

c)

"High" is a relative term: Say the typical scholastic achiever experiences a standard dopamine level of +40, while someone with a depression, or a psychosis, or anxiety has a vastly lower standard dopamine experience level, say +2, or as low as -40. If a person with a severe state of mental stress were to suddenly be in the brain and body of a scholastic achiever, it would feel to them exactly the same as if they were on a large dose of cocaine. But to each person, their standard dopamine experience level gives them their familiarity, from which they shape their expectations and beliefs surrounding what human life is.

That level is quantifiable by the amount of released dopamine a person has relative to the amount of work which their brain is trying to accomplish. The work which a brain is trying to accomplish is not visible by outward appearance, as a brain which is engaging more work than it has dopamine for will throttle, and become stuck. And the experience to the person will be as though they are stagnant, like they don't know what they think or feel about things, and like they can't reach what they sense within their own mind. And their outward appearance can be anything, often appearing as though non-motivated or lazy, when in fact their brain simply doesn't have the dopamine to press upward against the weight of the work that is sitting in its pipelines.

d)

Even though people from all dispositions use a term of stress at various times to describe their state, it is referring to completely distinct considerations, depending upon whom it is being spoken by. A person for whom a +10 dopamine experience level is their consistent normal, will call experiencing a temporary reduction to a +5 dopamine experience level as stress, while a person for whom a +40 dopamine experience level is normal, someone like a typical doctor, will call their exposure to mere +30 dopamine experience level "stressful", and start to expect all kinds of pampering and become unwilling to exert themselves further on anyone's behalf except for their own.

And then, quite often, that doctor will unflinchingly suggest, opine, or assert that someone who feels hopeless and and undeserving of help from people while they are stuck in dopamine experience level of -5, which is the only experience they know of, is an abuser of drugs, which, when they use, might only elevate their dopamine experience level to a mere +2. The real abuse of drugs in these instances is the doctor using their dopamine to impose a false, hypocritical, and harmful determination upon a person who is innocent of what they are accused of.

And, further, doctors will place all kinds of burdens upon the most destitute of people, for them to pursue as their treatment, which they would never consider subjecting themselves to, if the relative work weight were put forth before them. They would balk at it, aghast, as if the proposition were monstrously inhumane and completely irreverent of their person.

As an example, think of the eye-opener of simulated extreme labour pains that some women feel, being given to men. Likewise, doctors have no experience to reference that would make them capable assessors of what is appropriate for mental stress ailment sufferers to be treated with. People are only able to succeed scholastically, to possibly become doctors, due to having a level of dopamine released and available within their brains that makes them entirely virgin and non-relating to the experiences of those suffering mental stress ailments. A doctor has typically never come even close to conceiving what the reality is for people with dopamine deficiency - and their doctrines surrounding dopamine and mental stress treatment are direct reflections of their lack of comprehension and qualification.

The doctors of today, whose doctrine is self-aggrandizing and serves them far more than those they impose it upon, fulfill the role of the Pharisees in Jesus' day: "For they bind heavy burdens, which are grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers."

So, what constitutes as a "high" to a person with a low standard dopamine experience level is actually viewed as a state of stress to one with a high standard dopamine experience level. A scholastically-achieving person, without any mental stress, is very 'high' 24/7, relative to a person suffering a mental stress ailment. But to both of them, their experience will be the only one that they are familiar with, and this leads to people from all dispositions using the same terms while meaning entirely incompatible concepts, without them realizing it.

ii.

Whenever a doctor tells a person that drugs are not an answer, or not a good answer, it is a tell-tale sign that that doctor is the typical institutional fact-regurgitating hack, and has no truthful connectivity in their brain between the considerations which their perceived facts bear upon one another.

Even when counselling is an answer, even when taking a walk is an answer, even when taking a few days of rest is an answer, drugs are still an inalienable part of all those answers, due to the impacts those things have on the drug levels in the person's brain: Directly or indirectly, drugs are a part of the answer.

The human brain is a massive drug bath, and a human will not get from state A to state B apart from engaging a manipulation of the drugs swilling in their brain. And while it can be laborious, long-term, and possibly futile to get that manipulation through available indirect avenues, the same difference can be fulfilled in moments, or in a relatively short period of time, by directly engaging the brain’s drug adjustment requirements.

Drugs are never an answer all on their own, as they supply a brain with its needed considerations to do its work, but they are always a part of the answer, perhaps even the only part that is missing, as they serve to enable and facilitate movement towards the considerations that mean a person’s complete healing – which is movement that is largely unavailable and non-manageable for a person apart from extraneous drug use, as is made evident by the fact that mental stress ailments actually still exist in society after over 100 years of their scientific study.

If doctors can convince people that drugs are not the answer, or not a good answer, then they set themselves up as benefactors to profit off of people’s perpetual illnesses, because drugs are always going to be a primary component to every human health answer. And the people who are convinced that drugs are not an answer are going to perpetually require assistance so long as they avoid the root causes of their issue.

If a person doesn't like having cracked lips, a dry throat, a head-ache, or discomfort permeating their entire body due to dehydration, their options are to either drink water to prevent and resolve those unfavourable conditions, or otherwise endure the outcomes of being insufficiently hydrated. Like-wise, if a person doesn't like having depression, anxiety, psychosis, schizophrenia, bi-polarity, and doesn't like being vulnerable to PTSD, alzheimer's, parkinson's, and a host of other dopamine deficiency-emergent ailments... and also if they also don't like having their potential in life bottle-necked, and them never reaching the level of accomplishment which they see and know is possible, then they can either take control of, and learn to become responsible for their brain and body's natural dynamic dopamine requirements, or otherwise endure the outcomes of not having sufficiently accepted, or tended to their body's fundamental dopamine needs.

A person does not enter into those non-favourable states, apart from having less than optimally tended to their dopamine and consideration needs.

iii.

As I have said, those who call themselves doctors and scientists have done all things wrong. Scientists mock homeopathy and other “new-age” approaches as being fantasy, and call them harmful by way of causing a person to not seek more appropriate health treatment - but doctors and scientists espouse and perform all the exact same air-headedness when they tell and attempt to convince people that drugs are not an answer, or not the answer, or not a good answer. And when scientists and doctors do so, they commit the far greater offence, because, in an act of mental abuse, and in arrogance, they impose their harmful and ignorant determinations upon others, rather than simply exercising domain over their own body by making those choices for themselves.

The only reason a doctor is even in the position to be able to try to convince another person to not view drugs as a solution (though they assuredly have always been) is because the doctor already has enough of the same drugs released available in their brain to keep them out of the afflicted states of the people they might say such things to. So, anyone telling another human that drugs are not an answer is firstly telling that person an ignorant and harmful falsehood, but is also being an egregious hypocrite, as much as there ever was.

No human ever resolved a health issue apart from the engagement drugs, because the physical human body is drug-based, and a continual orgy of drugs for as long as it remains alive - and its life is dependent upon it.

iv.

By the way, considering is movement, and anything which engages consideration is provoking movement, and changing the form of a state – and the difference between any two states is a defined set of considerations. And the state of consideration in a person is the state of their brain-wiring, which directs health or sickness, which delivers capacity to overcome or vulnerability. When a person receives the necessary consideration to improve their state via something that may be classified as homeopathy, or new-age, which they would not have otherwise engaged, then that homeopathy or new-ageness thing would have indeed served as cure. The extent to which this can be productive has never been known by institutional medicine, but everything unfurls into consideration, and there are no limits to what can be done via considering.

But the ability for a human brain to consider exists in an environment of it having ample dopamine availability.

Shrapnel

There is No Such Thing as Too Much Dopamine as an Ailment

i.

Serving as an example of another perfect inaccuracy in medical attribution, there exist recommendations of lowering dopamine to deal with certain behavioural issues, such as impulsive behaviour, including addiction - neither of which are caused by having too much dopamine, but by the connectivity of a brain having considered in a manner, or been collapsed into a manner, which guides behaviour down such avenues. The high dopamine is caused by the low consideration - and not the impulsiveness (which is a product of low consideration) caused by high dopamine.

Diverting attention from the actual root causes of those behaviours, which is the consideration that guides them, to dopamine, has deadly repercussions for millions of people around the world, and creates an atmosphere of ignorance that prevents truthful physiological understanding arising so that and real and positive resolutions can be had.

ii.

Considering is the work of a brain that requires dopamine, and which forms the connections in a brain that guide a person's behaviour - and well-considered connectivity is what normalizes a brain.

A person who has reduced normalization in their brain by making determinations can be vulnerable to impulsive tendencies, and may also have a surplus of dopamine availability from reducing the amount of work their brain is doing. The issue there isn't too much dopamine, but a lack of connection-forming consideration to make use of the dopamine that's available - and this state is called being a sociopath / psychopath.

When a person has impulsive tendencies (which can occur where there is dopamine deficiency as well), the sickness is not the dopamine that is available, but the manner in which the person has considered their mind. Dopamine doesn't make a person impulsive anyway - it is what gives a person all their control over their mind, and their potential for the mental work that is considering. And what they consider will develop the pathway that will guide their behaviours.

It is not justified, or appropriate to blame dopamine availability for particular people's behaviour, and then restrict everyone's access to dopamine so that hundreds of millions of mental stress sufferers are tortured and exploited, just so that sociopaths and psychopaths do not need to admit to and confront their personal flaws and selfishness.

As it is, the people with the problems inside of themselves are the ones designating institutional ailments and treatments. They're saying that any number of innocent people need to suffer and be denied their deserved cure, so that they can continue being well-comforted while playing out a facade.

In an act of ultimate irresponsibility, they are imposing the penalty of their own guilt onto people who have done nothing wrong. And they profit heavily as the main benefactors from the torture it causes those people, both financially, and in ill-gained reputations within society as carers of people - whose problems they are the cause of, as well as obstructions to the needed cure, as if profiteering off the suffering of others is the sociopath's reward for ensuring that the suffering persists.

Now that I have elucidated the matter and corrected the attribution of fault in an impulsive person from dopamine to a lack of sound consideration, there is no longer justification for withholding the proper treatment from those who need it. Sociopaths need to learn to consider, and people with mental stress need powerful dopamine increases.

iii.

If a person has impulsive tendencies, then it isn't directly because of dopamine in any way. Though if a person has allowed pathways to consider which cause impulsiveness, having dopamine available will have a role in helping enable those pathways to be engaged. But having dopamine available is also what will enable it to be corrected by considering - a person cannot make one change in their brain, for good or bad, apart from having available dopamine.

Addressing an issue by clamping down dopamine is only masking the problem, and is not addressing it at its root. And thinking of dopamine reduction as a tool to avoid the problem has very harmful, including deadly consequences for millions of people who require increased dopamine to be healthy and in control of their lives.

Decreasing dopamine is not a solution to anything, and is running away from personal responsibility. And it is only even conjectured to be a solution because those who suggest it are only personally familiar with having a consistent high level of dopamine, and with no alternate experience to contrast their own with, they are left egregiously unfamiliar with dopamine's actual effect and importance - and this makes the things that they propose and impose on other people based in ignorance and hypocrisy.

A person who is familiar with dopamine is not going to choose to lower it to address any specific problem, because lowering it will reduce the capability and quality of a great many things. Lowering dopamine only stands a chance to reduce impulsive behaviour by reducing work potential of a brain enough so that there's no extra capability to engage considerations further than basic awareness. Awareness itself will be decreased, as will positive experience of senses, critical thinking capability, creative expression, visual depth perception, aural articulation, energy, and more.

Lowering dopamine lowers a person's capability to experience, perceive, and engage life, and lowering dopamine to address a particular behavioural problem would be like a person responding to having a messy home by having their sight, smell, and touch disabled so that they don't encounter their messy home's unpleasantness, rather that tending to the mess by cleaning it up.

Lowering dopamine is avoiding a problem, rather than dealing with it, and it is a selfish approach because it also encourages the continued victimization of many people who are being denied the dopamine they fundamentally require to be healthy, and to experience and enjoy life.

Shrapnel

Response to a Cocaine Study Which Bore a Non-Observable Conclusion

Beneath is my response to the 2013 study:
Cocaine’s effect on mice may explain human drug-seeking behavior

A simplified overview of the researchers' conclusions is here:
Cocaine use boosts learning and decision-making... but only as part of increasing dependency



These other posts also supplement my responses given here:
Earlier instance of the same study-scenario - different result
Additional instances of same study

--------------------------------


A short version of my response, targeted towards the simplified "overview" article is:

I don't actually see support for the latter portion of the headline, "but only as part of increasing dependency", in the mentioned observations from the study. I don't see any measurement of dependency, or changing degree of dependency in the given information. I also don't see a sound relation between seeking cocaine and the growth of dendritic spines.

What it appears to discover is that as the mice exert more effort to think and decide, more dendritic spines are formed... and confirms that cocaine improves learning, complex thinking, and memory - period.

Within the environment in which they have been placed, the number one motivation for the mice to think hard is to figure out where the cocaine came from, and where it will next be. If their minds were used for other processes of equal strength, they would surely display the same rate of dendritic spines growth. If this were studied in humans, and the humans were to use their time while cocaine-stimulated to learn a new subject, or perform other mental challenges, they would display the same growth, or more - but towards those new subjects.

--------------------------------


My fuller response, which I sent to the university that carried out the study, is this:

Hello. This is feedback for the article study-based article "Cocaine’s effect on mice may explain human drug-seeking behavior".

I don't see a sound relation between seeking cocaine and the growth of dendritic spines.

What it appears to discover is that, under the influence of cocaine, as the mice have gained ability to exert greater effort to think and decide, more dendritic spines are formed - and that, specifically in this lab environment where they have been placed, their primary (or even only) possible motivation to process thought happens to be to figure out where cocaine might be. If their minds were used for other processes of equal strength, they would surely display the same rate of dendritic spines growth - but they are unlikely to face such a possibly, if for no other reason than that they are just mice and which lead the lives of lab mice. If this was studied in humans, and the humans were to use their time while cocaine-stimulated to learn a new subject or perform other mental challenges, the results would most likely display the same growth, or more.

In the study, mice always preferred the side of the chamber from where they had received cocaine. You could replace cocaine with any positive stimulus, and the result would likely always be the same as it was with the cocaine. In a chamber containing a straight male human with a high sex drive, you could put pornography or a naked companion of the kind they like on that side of the chamber, and they would likewise always head to that side.

There is nothing about the cocaine being cocaine, or a drug, that is a significant factor in this.

There are two similar compartments, one thing makes them stand apart, and that thing is enjoyable/pleasurable/satisfying - like offering a meal to somebody who needs to eat. The choice is merely 'pleasurable and satisfying' versus 'nothingness', and, in this case, the nothingness is even below simply nothing... in reality there is no choice for the mouse, and only one direction offered. Which will somebody, anybody, any creature choose? The only thing that's there, at all.

The quote from one of those who studied, "Our images provide clear evidence that cocaine induces rapid gains in new spines, and the more spines the mice gain, the more they show they learned about the drug," seems partially potentially misleading. The study does indeed show that cocaine induces rapid gains in new spines, and therefore enhances learning and cognitive abilities.

But, as previously mentioned, it didn't clearly show that the direct result is that they learn specifically about the drug, but it suggests that they were capable of learning faster and more solidly, regardless of where they focused that learning. When it comes to lab mice whose lives consist of a lot of nothingness and then some cocaine, anything assumed based on their direction of response being towards the cocaine is undependable data.

"Learned about the drug" probably means "were able to recall where the drug last was", and I am wondering how much there would be for a mouse to learn during subsequent trials. I am assuming that the mice would have done a backtrack through their memories to allocate all the places in which the cocaine had been administered, and then focused on the locales where it was most commonly given, which would maybe then be where they would think that there is the best chance of cocaine being again.

It seems like a simple study from which data may be being slightly misconstrued to fit pre-expected or designated meanings, by whoever is testing.

I think there is interesting data to learn here with additional tests, but I would not be eager to derive any assumptions about dependency from a lab rat who has nothing going for it other than the occasional dose of cocaine. If you take a lab-kept human, and occasionally let it out of its cage to receive some sex... since it doesn't even know anything apart from its cage and sex, is is ever going to show an inclination towards anything other than sex, when it is let out of its cage?

If possible to be approved, this study should be done with humans who don't know what the goal of the study is, who don't know specifically what they are being given, and who should then be instructed to study subjects which are first measured for how taxing they are to a particular individual, for the duration of the drug. The growth of dendritic spines should then be measured. I think that the more a person tries to think, the greater the growth of dendritic spines will be, and that cocaine will boost this growth dependent on the subject's exertion, regardless of motive or subject.

Shrapnel

Operational Identity of the Prefrontal Cortex

The Prefrontal Cortex is home of Subjective responses.

It is the ability for Information-Retention, and for giving Directives upon that information.



The Prefrontal Cortex provides the empty Container-Space in which the Anterior Insula's Detail-Awareness, Considering, Understanding, and Comprehension can breathe. It is like a papyrus, and the Anterior Insula a quill and inspiration.

Its space is not one-dimensional, and it is responsible for enabling depth of detail-perception as well as quantity of details, and also length of time in which details can be in-taken to contribute toward perception. The Detail-Awareness comes from the Anterior Insula, whose output is received by the Prefrontal Cortex.



The Prefrontal Cortex is conventionally considered responsible for Critical-Thinking, but this is half-False.

There can not be Truth (reasoning) and Choice (determining) from the same region, because the two are dependent upon antithetical circumstances: One must have connections between its data to produce context for understanding something as truth, while the other must have no connection between its data in order to be able to make decisions based on, but independent from data. One must be Value-Based, the other Value-Less.

Critical-Thinking is fully-reliant upon Anterior Insula Detail-Awareness and Comprehension before Determining gets its moment. Critical-Thinking is all three of these things acting together.

And Detail-Awareness and Comprehension employment depends on Prefrontal Cortex dopamine availability. Development, and use of Detail-Awareness are slightly different things.

The Prefrontal Cortex and the Anterior Insula are an operational team, with antithetical responsibilities.

The Prefrontal Cortex does not think (where thinking is contemplating), it subjectively reacts to thought in the likeness of often-dynamic If / Then statements upon Anterior Insula conditions, with Schematics of these If / Then statements creating response behavioural patterns.

'Thought' from region is falsified, imagined, delusioned - and there is a lot of false-thinking coming from it in the world. Most people actually form invalid If / Then thought schematics and live life through them, believing they are actually thinking - it's the norm.

There doesn't need to be an 'If' for a 'Then', meaning 'Do' is also enactable - but takes more effort, which amounts to more regional dopamine-availability necessitated.



Dopamine in this region is uniquely subject to willed-regulation - something I am not going to detail in this post. Lower dopamine equates lower information retention, and that retention is Working-Memory.

When someone has difficulty with attention and focus, increasing this region's dopamine will resolve it - if adrenaline's factoring doesn't negate any supplementation efforts.



When the Prefrontal Cortex receives Anterior Insula output, it is like it is Importing or Cloning parts of the Anterior Insula - parts which it can then subjectively decide upon.

A more greatly developed Anterior Insula requires a higher dopamine level in the Prefrontal Cortex to handle, cope, and work with the information it transmits to it, and to resolve any experienced challenges from that Anterior Insula's considering.

When there are threatening problems in the Anterior Insula's considering, the Prefrontal Cortex' dopamine is essential to be able to intercede and will cessation of troubling operations - done through an If / Then, or Do directive that cancels processes. Lower Prefrontal Cortex dopamine equates lower ability to make decisions and take control within the mind - and this is the nature of Mental Stress ailment.

Identity:

Container-Space for Anterior Insula Detail-Awareness
Source of Subjective Perception

Action-Determining
Reactive

Qualities:

Information-Retention (Working-Memory)

Directive-Giving (Decisions)

'If / Then' Schematic-forming (conditions for responses)

Or just 'Do' commands
Intercession of Anterior Insula considering

Half of Critical-Thinking

Regional capability is diminished and also lost when its regulated dopamine becomes low

Shrapnel

The Grand Correction upon the Conventions of Reasoning

P.1 - Pre, re-cap
P.2 - Value of the Insula being insular
P.3 - What is not related
P.4 - Post-cap
P.5 - Because these things are certain...
P.6 - Reason vs Science
P.7 - Children of Reason




P.1

First, I said I would detail the reality of cranial-Reasoning, in correction of the erroneous convention - but as I regarded what actually exists as documented regarding these subjects, I was astounded by the pure gibberish that apparently currently depicts how people's brains are functioning - which is to say, they're not. I don't want to waste words, so I'm keeping this minimal, and continuing below instead with what is more important to know as the groundwork for any thing taking part in existing within this universe - and if you don't have this down, no matter how much you point to your egregiously brief inarguable present material-manifestation - you ultimately don't exist, and that manifestation will cease as its molecules fall-apart.

Anyway, a sporadic minimal correction of the convention regarding Reasoning as an action of the brain:

The Anterior Insula is an access-sealed vault that stores all your considerations in their most concept-segregated forms, with True/False, 1/0, Yes/No polarity to each of them, which is literally the transistor-effect. Apart from this effect, it is impossible for Truth-verification to exist - and if this wasn't in the Anterior Insula, human beings wouldn't be anything, they wouldn't have instincts, there wouldn't be detection between life/death, and this Human-thing wouldn't have formed - because without these values producing Truth-determination, there's no determined reason for the host-consciousness, and no value to be determined from it.



P.2

As said, the Anterior Insula is access-sealed, and that's the only possible way which Truth-verification may exist - if those values were manipulable, a person altering just a single one could invalidate their entirety, and that person's brain would instantly lose value of everything, and they'd instantly-cease. It would be division by zero, enacted upon that conscious existence. It would nullify. This is because the value of any consideration is as contextual to the rest - this is the basis principle for all Reasoning:

'Because this is certain, therefore these other things also are certain - but these further things are certain-Falsehoods' - and from this, all things can be discovered, in rapid-time. This is the foundational principle behind the Reason method I am to demonstrate.

There should consequently be no such thing as Critical-Thinking from the Prefrontal-Cortex, because this region is characterized by self-determination - which is accomplished precisely because there exists no valuation to thoughts within its range. And the Prefrontal Cortex region is dependent upon Anterior Insula output, with the Anterior Insula being aware of Prefrontal-Cortex interests, and serving them, while maintaining its consideration-vault's necessary isolation.

What is regarded as brain-activity in regions during Reasoning, etc, is merely reactionary to the actual Reasoning - and Reasoning is an extremely light-weight process-automation, and I think thousands of simultaneous streams of it can fit into the pipeline-consumption as a single normal Prefrontal-Cortex thought. It is unlikely that Reasoning displays as much of anything in PET brain scans.



P.3

Now, I really don't know what any of this literal Falsehood exists for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason

A person perusing that would get the impression that "R-e-a-s-o-n-" was just some miscellaneous string of letters, floating around ethereally, determined to be useful as a scrap-container for whatever junk any random person happened to need to offload - which they subsequently stuffed into it.

I don't know why all those people misused the term, but Reason is already claimed - and claimed since the origin of this universe - and it's hard-coded into existence, right here, in the concept which gives the word its definition:

What is the reason for ____? Why is ____?

Reason: the Why, How, and Way of a thing; The Answer to any condition.

So Reason literally is 'The Answer' to anything and also to everything which it is applied, making it the most valuable thing in all existence, and yet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason ) all this worthless junk is found to be squatting in its place. Going forward, know that all that non-Reasoning bulk is never, here at Shrapnel Reason, being referred to, and that only the literal meanings to Reason and Reasoning are regarded as existing.

Because Reason is 'The Answer', its methodology is already comprehensively complete and fully contained within its single-word domain, Reason.



P.4

Reasoning, the highest-form of all information-processing in all existence, is the revelation of Truth using only Truth. In the human brain, it is purely the consequence of inter-calculation pinging off all the Anterior Insula's considerations - and every consideration's value, no matter what it is, will contribute a Truth-certainty as well as a certain-Falsehood - upon every concept to which it's deferred.

Billions of Anterior Insula information-bits can manifest the conclusion to the most esoteric theories, near-instantly or instantly - but it won't unless a person has first structured their mind in the singular way that it is designed from the dust-up to function - with the Prefrontal Cortex as merely a vacuous creation-environment, and reserved-energy storage-cell, in which every conceived and non-conceived thing can be produced through willed-structuring of Anterior Insula consideration-determinations - deferring to the Anterior Insula to produce every concept.



P.5

'Because this is certain, therefore these other things are also certain - but these further things are certain-Falsehoods'

If someone had applied Reason's principle to the ex-convention of Dopamine being 'Reward', they would have realized this:

<--Vital---Important---Helpful---Optional---Auxiliary---Reward-->

This is a spectrum for potential attributions to the value and role of Dopamine. They all exist along a single parameter, and there will not exist a dual-placement. A molecule is an energy-concept, stored in matterial form, and is not bi-polar. Split identities will indicate two separate and incongruous concepts.

If looking at its characteristics, it's observed that the active-diminishment of dopamine has all-impacting effects upon a person's capability to operate - and also their mood, their health, their cooperation, and their resilience. Therefore, it is clear that its role is at minimal Important, though is already apparently Vital to productivity, energy. However, if it is looked at even more finely, it is seen that it is in fact the chief-motivator behind all brain-activity, and in-fact the brain will not operate apart from it. Therefore, because it is of Vital attribution in its conduct, Dopamine as 'Reward' is a certain-Falsehood.

A mere moment of applying Reason debunks decades of medical-Science convention, effortlessly - and its earlier awareness would have prevented decades of deadly-harm to individuals, and pervasive-malady across societies.

In turns medical-convention on its head, leaving it to shit all over itself.



P.6

In Science there are things referred to as hard-sciences, and then there is that which is not referred to as a hard-science. Hard-science is a misnomer, with those things labeled as hard-sciences simply being strict-Reasons, but these subjects include Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics. Logic-determination is also a hard-determiner (AKA, one of Reason's sub-formats), using Mathematical valuations to determine statements.

If logic-determination is applied to the Scientific Method, this is what produces as True:

1 - Scientific-Fact: 'That which is most reasonably-assumed to be True'
2 - 'That which is most reasonably-assumed to be True' < True
3 - Scientific-Fact < True
4 - Scientific Fact == False
5 - Scientific-Fact: a certain-Falsehood
6 - Science: A body of certain-Falsehoods

Science's procedure: Disjoint, Fractionalize, Reduce
Reason's procedure: Flourish, Evolve, Unify

Psychosis: Disjoint, Fractionalize, Reduce

And refer to P.5 to review yourselves that this is the reality: The Scientific Method and Reason Method are antithesis, and the Scientific-Method chases the exactly-False tail-end anti-Truth of a thing, while Reason amasses a Truth's full-Realization.

Reason is thousands of times more proficient than Science, and while Science produces Falsehoods, Reason cannot produce a falsehood as per its principle of dictation by hard-sameness and hard-antithesis. Reason is full-replacement of Science, and when standing-before Reason, Science is as if it never was, and of no-effect.

There will be an expanded version of this matter, later.


P.7

Reason is the language which the brain operates within, and Reason is the language of all the universe and everything that exists. Everything is knowable through Reason, and Truth is singular, and a singularity, navigable in-full by Reason.

Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics are strictly Reasons, and they adhere in-full to the principles and operations of Reason. Reason is the singular hard-determiner for All-Truth, and it doesn't experience borders to any subject, and applies equally-perfectly to every last consideration and topic in existence.

Concepts are the language of the Mind, and Reason is the language of Concepts. Everything is there-and-herein resolved.

.      -   -      .

~~~ ~~~  /       \  ~~~ ~~~

;                  .      ..      .                  ;

;                                                                    ;

 .        .        .

.  .       .  .  .     .  .  .  .  .     .  .  .       .  .

.  .     .  .

.   .

.     . .              . .     .

..       .   .   .       ..

.. . ... . . .    .. . . ....  . . . . . . .   .... .. .... .. . . . ... .. . .. . . . . . ...

So fun.

Shrapnel