M Database Inspector (cheetah)
|Not logged in. Login|
|Sun, Jul 01 2007||12||The Theory||
Pavlov has discovered that if he rings a bell
every time he feeds his dog,
then the bell ring will in time cause his dog to drool,
without any food.
Science ignored him, mostly.
It is insulting to compare human psychology to that of a dog.
Inside the human skull, there is one very smart system,
copied over many times, with some variations.
The variations depend on evolutionary age
and so are their quality and perfection level.
Most systems are quite ancient,
and a muscle memory unit,
and a Pavlovian response system,
are two such examples.
Yet I believe, and would care to define for the purpose
of noSoul, a muscle memory unit as the building block
unit of the brain, convenient enough to serve as a model
for this theory, and its underlying research.
A Pavlovian response is just one implementation
of several muscle memory units performing
together a useful function important for the survival
of their host body:
Making a statistical deduction with a sample of exactly two -
correlating a sensory event with another -
and attaching the corresponding behaviour fit for one event, to the other.
This subsystem in this case, makes the
correlation between the presence of food
and the ring of the bell,
thereby nearly guaranteeing that under natural
circumstances the bell signifies the presence of food.
By starting to drool before the food actually arrives, the dog
is ready to process the food earlier than otherwise,
thereby giving him a relative advantage.
Under harsh natural conditions this advantage might mean
the difference between life and death,
and so the existence of such a system is beneficial
the dog, from the perspective of evolutionary development.
In other words, if it so happens that by some slight mutation of the workings
of the brain such a system of correlation occurs, then it is more likely that
its owner will live longer to leave its genes to the next generation,
and along with them this particular instinct.
Over many generations, such instinct will spread to more descendants,
while others not possessing it, will leave less descendants, and variations
of this instinct will converge with this same process, until they are very small,
and the instict becomes uniformly spread among all individuals.
We can then say this trait has become perfected.
I suspect such correlation mechanisms are to a degree
present in primitive creatures like the amoeba where
there is not specifically a central brain,
yet the presence of danger will generate locomotion,
thereby expressing a Pavlov's response resembling fear:
The mental equivalent of the correlation between danger and
the instinctive according action.
We can look at patterns of behavior of animals,
and judge their level of perfection from researching
their evolutionary origin.
Pavlov was ignored because much like Darwin,
he was insulting humanity.
The Pavlov response prooves beyond doubt,
that man will not be able to restrain a drool,
given the right cicumstances.
Thinking of the individual subsystems in the brain as independent,
it is interesting to compare their inter-relationships to the animals in nature:
The most common relationship in nature is that of symbiosis.
All individuals sharing a territory will share portions
of these relationships with respect to very minute goals
The subsystems in the brain, though independent,
share the same kind of interest.
In a perfect brain,
the subsystems will be in perfect symbiosis with one another.
Such is the case with Pavlov's Dog.
Man's brain, much like the hands of the Orangutan,
is in an early stage of development and as such is not perfect.
Like the Orangutan, man's imperfection is in its most
unique and advantageous quality.
Unlike the Orangutan, who's perfection lacks in the hands,
mankind's perfection lacks mostly in the human portions
of the brain.
Recent research shows that the human brain,
as well as that of all animals,
is composed entirely of memory systems of various kinds.
It is also known that those systems are composed
of many, near identical, simple elements:
neurons and synapses.
From evolution theory it is implied that similar structures must have common origins,
be the structures the legs of a centipede, similar structures across individuals of
the same species, or similar structures from individuals in different species,
indicating their common ancestry.
Recent research also shows that muscle memory can be trained
without the use of muscles, or their immediately related brain activity.
(BBC - The Human Mind - 2003).
noSoul claims that a base uniform unit of muscle memory
composition can be treated as the single building block
composing the human brain.
This includes memory for automatic muscle activity,
but also composes systems for vision and other sensory
perception and analysis and most importantly
emotions, and conscious thought.
The philosophical/theological question of choice is challenged.
Is brainwashing a morality in or out this simple?
Charles Darwin mentions this without detail in the final
words of his book on evolution theory.
During those times it was frightening enough to expose
The Origin of Species, and the ideas were kept
well hidden among the scientific community until
political forces from within made Darwin publish his work.
It is no surprise that around the same time Gregor Mendel
was developing the theory of Genetics in a monastery,
only to be discovered later by his student monks.