View Full Version : Nature And Nurture


mildadhd
04-19-16, 10:24 PM
"Affective Verses Cognition" or "Affective And Cognition"?









m

Greyhound1
04-19-16, 10:56 PM
Affective and Cognitive was my vote. Everything in life seems to be a balance.

dvdnvwls
04-20-16, 02:12 AM
I want to vote both choices, because both of them are sometimes useful ways of looking at things. Sometimes affect and cognition really do oppose each other, but at other times they sort of work together. In my opinion, the ideal is to be mentally flexible, and allow either one of the poll answers to "win" depending on the circumstances - basically, deciding which way of looking at things turns out to be more useful in your current situation.

Fuzzy12
04-20-16, 02:39 AM
What's the question? :)

Is it if they work together or against each other? I think both depending on context.

mildadhd
04-20-16, 07:27 AM
Thanks.

Let me rephrase the question.

Affective or Cognitive,

or

Affective and Cognitive?



m

Fuzzy12
04-20-16, 07:34 AM
Thanks.

Let me rephrase the question.

Affective or Cognitive,

or

Affective and Cognitive?



m

Umm....that's not rephrasing :-) Could you elaborate please? I'm sorry but I'm still not sure I understand. Are you asking if both emotions and cognitions affect us at the same time or if it's always one of them at a time? Or if one is more dominant than the other in influencing our behaviour? Is it their effect on behaviour you are interested in? Or development?

mildadhd
04-20-16, 07:47 AM
Umm....that's not rephrasing :-) Could you elaborate please? I'm sorry but I'm still not sure I understand.



In the old days, there was the old nature verses nature debate.

Now most everyone agrees that it is not nature or nature, its nature and nature.

With that comparison in MindBrain, I picked affective and cognitive, because the don't work separately.



m

Fuzzy12
04-20-16, 07:53 AM
By affective do you mean emotions?

mildadhd
04-20-16, 08:04 AM
By affective do you mean emotions?

Yes.

Emotional feelings.

Affect are primary feelings.

There are 3 types of feelings.

-Emotional affect
-Sensory affect
-Homeostatic affect

(focusing on emotional feelings, in this thread)



m

Laserbeak
04-20-16, 06:38 PM
If I understand you properly, I think a better way to put it would be with three options like this:

ADHD is caused by:

a) genetic factors
b) environmental factors
c) a combination of both


Is that what you're talking about or am I way off?

mildadhd
04-20-16, 10:00 PM
If I understand you properly, I think a better way to put it would be with three options like this:

ADHD is caused by:

a) genetic factors
b) environmental factors
c) a combination of both


Is that what you're talking about or am I way off?

Thanks.

Genetic or Epigenetic, or, Genetic and Epigenetic.





m

mildadhd
04-20-16, 11:57 PM
Affective (genetic) and Cognitive (epigenetic)


http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg








http://emotionresearcher.com/the-emotional-brain/panksepp/

Fuzzy12
04-21-16, 02:26 AM
How exactly would adhd be caused epigenetically? Is it through stress on the mother?

SB_UK
04-21-16, 09:30 AM
"Affective Verses Cognition" or "Affective And Cognition"?
m


Would people prefer to be 'happy' (affective) or 'clever' (cognitive) ?
Society favours 'clever' over 'happy'.

If we us the definition I use of 'clever' (cognitive) as logically consistently (rationally) moral.

Then we can't be 'happy' (affective) in any meaningful sense until we're rationally moral.

So The goal is to attain wisdom (pure rational morality) from which 'happy' (affective) is an inevitable consequence if the individual and society both operate to the rational moral protocol.

Interesting in that

cognitive
clever
autism
unemotional state for whatever reason
MALE ARCHETYPE
^
|
MORAL (cognitive doesn't mean anything unless it encodes a moral framework)
|
v
where they meet is where we become 'human'
^
|
EMOTIONAL (emotional is not useful unless it's happiness through pursuit of a moral framework)
|
v
FEMALE ARCHETYPE
emotional
irrational
schizophrenia
overly emotional for next to no reason ie drama queen

SB_UK
04-21-16, 09:33 AM
What about genome, epigenome, connectome etc ?
All essential but problems attributed to these corrected by the individual and society building a mind which is moral.

SB_UK
04-21-16, 09:43 AM
sad thing is - is that science has rather gotten carried away with its technological gadgets for assessing every physical character down to the molecular level

- the problems of man are obvious to any who think about it after some time observing and analysing the structures of minds by virtue of the words people use

- language choice is a mirror on the soul'underlying moral nature'

--- and all that's wrong with people is that human beings have completely FAILED to realise that the mind is only formed through merger between cognitive and emotonal -

through pursuit of cognitive alone - society has fallen apart.

All that we need to do is realise that education and application must fall under the headline banner of morality.

Do this - and all human problems will abate.

-*-

Just 1 error which marks out 5000 years of recorded human history.

We 'grew' a mind and then didn't know what to do with it.

Stevuke79
04-21-16, 11:15 AM
How exactly would adhd be caused epigenetically? Is it through stress on the mother?


There is research which suggests that adhd shares its genetic origin with other disorders, and environmental factors in early childhood determine what disorder ultimately manifests. I don't think we know what those environmental factors might be, however.

Stevuke79
04-21-16, 01:14 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21728139
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3250517/

I think these 2 studies have been cited here a few times.

But to clarify .. it's not like you're genetically predisposed ... and too much TV or sugar or insufficient exercise pushes you over the edge. It's more subtle like (quoting) alcohol, tobacco, toxins, medication, psychological stressors... some stuff we cant even control 100%

I hate the world! I want a magic cure to protect my kid!!

Stevuke79
04-21-16, 01:20 PM
I don't actually hate the world.. I hate that the world does not always live up to my expectations.

When we die ... I hope the world let's us give an 'exit interview ' ... one of those things where you get to say "very satisfactory, .. satisfactory, .. unsatisfactory,.. very unsatisfactory,.."

I'd give the world a piece of my mind.. I suspect it will not be pleased with the marks it recieved from me..

Lunacie
04-21-16, 02:08 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21728139
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3250517/

I think these 2 studies have been cited here a few times.

But to clarify .. it's not like you're genetically predisposed ... and too much TV or sugar or insufficient exercise pushes you over the edge. It's more subtle like (quoting) alcohol, tobacco, toxins, medication, psychological stressors... some stuff we cant even control 100%

I hate the world! I want a magic cure to protect my kid!!

From my family history I could see that being the case.

My oldest grandchild has ADHD and her little sister has autism.

The biggest difference besides having moved to a different town was that my daughter was 2 months into the pregnancy when she lived through a tornado.

That is one heck of a lot of psychological stress on top of marriage problems that had her thinking about divorce.

Stevuke79
04-21-16, 02:26 PM
Right...that makes sense

Fuzzy12
04-21-16, 05:46 PM
I don't actually hate the world.. I hate that the world does not always live up to my expectations.

When we die ... I hope the world let's us give an 'exit interview ' ... one of those things where you get to say "very satisfactory, .. satisfactory, .. unsatisfactory,.. very unsatisfactory,.."

I'd give the world a piece of my mind.. I suspect it will not be pleased with the marks it recieved from me..

They should give us a customer satisfaction survey!!

Stevuke79
04-21-16, 06:41 PM
That's what I was looking for :)

mildadhd
04-21-16, 09:53 PM
How exactly would adhd be caused epigenetically? Is it through stress on the mother?


Self-regulation is epigenetic in everyone, ADHD or not. Causation is circular. Red is genetic. Green and Blue are epigenetic.


http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg








m

SB_UK
04-22-16, 08:30 AM
Self-regulation is epigenetic in everyone, ADHD or not. Causation is circular. Red is genetic. Green and Blue are epigenetic.


http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg

m

This image can be summarised simply.

MOTIVATION BY TAKING (ie you want something back)

emotion <-> reward system <-> mind

MOTIVATION BY GIVING (ie you don't require anything back)

emotion <-> reward system <-> mind


eg
private clinician .... ....reward system ... ... ... learn how to wine and dine
'joy' <-> ... ... ... ... .activated ... ... .. ... ... administrators of private hospitals

SB_UK
04-22-16, 08:38 AM
The simple summary to the image is that you can develop in one of 2 ways.

One way is towards taking -> ADDICTIVE mechanism
One way is towards giving -> achieved by developing a mind which knows morality -> WISDOM -> freedom

That's all

No need to understand anything from the structure of the proton, the hydrogen bond, the quaternary structure of a protein, the cellular structure of an organ, the structural organization of a brain, the {{{ANYTHING}}} ... ... ... you just need to understand a couple of sentences at the top of this post and everything else from a human health perspective falls into place.

SB_UK
04-22-16, 12:56 PM
The ultimate control of emotions is reward ie happy when have, unhappy when haven't
The ultimate control of mind is reward ie how to get more

2 reward systems

Taking (requires something back for services rendered)
Givinv (requires nothing back as giving is reward in itself)

ADOPT TAKING (today's society) -> everything falls apart

ADOPT GIVING -> EVERYTHING NATURALLY NORMALIZES

No war
No immigration
No famine
No disease
No deertification
No climate change
No homelessness
No ecosystem destruction

PEOPLE SIMPLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE THING CALLED MIND
IS TO BECOME MORAL.
IS TO BE MORAL.
IS TO LEARN WHAT MORALITY IS.
IS TO INVESTIGATE MORALITY.
IS TO TEST MORALITY.
IS TO EXTEND MORALITY.

-*-

everybody in current society are simply wasting their times doing nothing of importance because their minds are built around knowing stuff that's neither here nor there under the 'taking' reward system paradigm.

SB_UK
04-22-16, 01:09 PM
Post-edit

PEOPLE SIMPLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE EVOLUTIONSRILY INTENDED PURPOSE OF THE THING CALLED 'MIND'
.........................IS FOR IT TO BECOME MORAL.
.........................IS FOR IT TO BE MORAL.
.........................IS FOR IT TO LEARN WHAT MORALITY IS.
.........................IS FOR IT TO INVESTIGATE MORALITY.
.........................IS FOR IT TO TEST MORALITY.
.........................IS FOR IT TO EXTEND MORALITY.

-- and instead all that human beings do with their mind is learn esoteric jargon that they then use to fool those who lack knowledge of the jargon into paying for their services - or else their life won't be worth living.
NASTY NASTY HUMAN BEINGS.
In truth - nothing that human beings do is necessary; we can get by through simply dissolving work and living in self-seeding potatoes if that's what's required.
REALLY - it cannot be understated - human beings have become zombies under indoctrination of the capitalist way.

-*-

I'm prepared to take the entire species living and dead (their words live on) on in this idea - so sure am I that this 1 idea is correct.

Here it is again.

PEOPLE SIMPLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE EVOLUTIONSRILY INTENDED PURPOSE OF THE THING CALLED 'MIND'
.........................IS FOR IT TO BECOME MORAL.
.........................IS FOR IT TO BE MORAL.
.........................IS FOR IT TO LEARN WHAT MORALITY IS.
.........................IS FOR IT TO INVESTIGATE MORALITY.
.........................IS FOR IT TO TEST MORALITY.
.........................IS FOR IT TO EXTEND MORALITY.

SB_UK
04-22-16, 01:13 PM
Note that the relevance of the idea above to the thread is explained above in the Peripheral 3 stage diagram

EMOTION <-> REWARD* <-> COGNITION

to happy <-> GIVING <-> Moral construct of mind
to addictive pleasure/pain <-> TAKING <-> Immoral constuction of mind ie how to arrange next 'fix'

Little Missy
04-22-16, 06:16 PM
*plays organ*

Preaching the immoral and the moral again.

SB_UK
04-23-16, 06:06 AM
"Affective Verses Cognition" or "Affective And Cognition"?
m





https://books.google.co.uk/books/content?id=uDWP4lZMyOMC&printsec=frontcover&img=1&zoom=1&imgtk=AFLRE7392Ye0XPRaOH9yMqYkNV-rQtqudUOFYshNf9yN2fvBKhFBjrexhzF0W2uKwUWGGVpr-_UWxfd79UJOtSf3vCPsd9H4zMQg92Xfwl9XvzCEKBwESQxDwSX YbaK-ph0qryf_hopO

LILA
= The nature of reality (the intended but long forgotten basis to science)
SYSTEMATIZING
Peripheral uses term COGNITIVE MIND

AN ENQUIRY INTO MORALS
= The development of a mind which is moral in nature
EMPATHIZING/SOCIAL
Peripheral uses term EMOTIONAL/AFFECTIVE MIND


The goal is simply MORAL (REWARD SYSTEM)
Controls
Unconditioned emotional system reactivity

The goal is simply MORAL (REWARD SYSTEM)
Controls
Construction of Systematizing, thinking, cognitive mind.

The 3 aspects run together.

-*-

This idea is now phrased at a level that a 3 year old should be able to understand it - even a 3 year old ADDer with a 3 year developmental delay.

SB_UK
04-23-16, 06:16 AM
The answer isn't "Affective Verses Cognition" or "Affective And Cognition"?
The answer is
Image above


AfFECTIVE <-> reward system <-> COGNITIVE

REWARD SYSTEM INFLUENCES AFFECTIVE AND COGNITIVE.

If you choose reward system 'TAKE' then affective/cognitive systems are perverted into making the person an addict to money,power,abuse,gender abuse, competition,aggression.

If you choose reward system 'GIVE' then affective/cognitive systems are built to make the person develop personal quality which reflects itself in the individual deriving personal satisfaction from making the world better {{{period}}}.

In the 'TAKE' model *you* destroy the world.
Pretty much every human being that has lived has used this reward system.

In the 'GIVE' model *you* create a better world.
This model is so alien to human beings that it's possible that there may not be a single human being alive who can understand this idea.

mildadhd
04-23-16, 11:14 AM
Take And Give







m

Mantaray14
04-23-16, 11:35 AM
https://books.google.co.uk/books/content?id=uDWP4lZMyOMC&printsec=frontcover&img=1&zoom=1&imgtk=AFLRE7392Ye0XPRaOH9yMqYkNV-rQtqudUOFYshNf9yN2fvBKhFBjrexhzF0W2uKwUWGGVpr-_UWxfd79UJOtSf3vCPsd9H4zMQg92Xfwl9XvzCEKBwESQxDwSX YbaK-ph0qryf_hopO

LILA
= The nature of reality (the intended but long forgotten basis to science)
SYSTEMATIZING
Peripheral uses term COGNITIVE MIND

AN ENQUIRY INTO MORALS
= The development of a mind which is moral in nature
EMPATHIZING/SOCIAL
Peripheral uses term EMOTIONAL/AFFECTIVE MIND


The goal is simply MORAL (REWARD SYSTEM)
Controls
Unconditioned emotional system reactivity

The goal is simply MORAL (REWARD SYSTEM)
Controls
Construction of Systematizing, thinking, cognitive mind.

The 3 aspects run together.

-*-

This idea is now phrased at a level that a 3 year old should be able to understand it - even a 3 year old ADDer with a 3 year developmental delay.

I never read LILA (prob will soon, as I've been looking for some summer reading material), but Zen was also a phenomenal book. It must have been over 20 years ago when I read it, but the central theme has stuck in mind to this day. My half baked interpretation of it is that somewhere along the way, humans divorced philosophy/morality from science, the basis of which is now cemented in our very language. The original meaning of what "good" means was lost. In it's place has come a system of naming and categorizing (Aristotle) which had yielded unprecedented scientific breakthroughs, however the plot is still lost. Its probably more relevant today than when it was written....

mildadhd
04-23-16, 11:53 AM
SB_UK and other members interested. Would you be willing to have a discussion using a biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp to differentiate between bottom-up affection and top-down cognition, in regards to origin and treatment?




m

SB_UK
04-23-16, 02:45 PM
I never read LILA (prob will soon, as I've been looking for some summer reading material), but Zen was also a phenomenal book. It must have been over 20 years ago when I read it, but the central theme has stuck in mind to this day. My half baked interpretation of it is that somewhere along the way, humans divorced philosophy/morality from science, the basis of which is now cemented in our very language. The original meaning of what "good" means was lost. In it's place has come a system of naming and categorizing (Aristotle) which had yielded unprecedented scientific breakthroughs, however the plot is still lost. Its probably more relevant today than when it was written....

A perfect description
absolutely perfect description
of what I am describing.

SB_UK
04-23-16, 02:50 PM
_ and other members interested. Would you be willing to have a discussion using a biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp to differentiate between bottom-up affection and top-down cognition, in regards to origin and treatment?
m

It's ever so hard to use any non natural language because each word needs to carry with it a definition of precisely what the author means by the words.

I very much fear that what might happen is that we may find that there's confusion if some interprete words which Panksepp defines differently ... complete disagreement potentially violent through not having the precise intended defintiion of the words which Panksepp (anybody really) uses.

It really tires you out trying to explain that 'yes, you are right if you take that particular understanding of those words - but that's not what the words mean in the context that individual X is using them in' .... ...

The entire body of human communication appears to lie somewhere on the 'lost in translation' spectrum no matter how gifted 2 individuals might consider themselves at the language medium used.

If you can list the words that we're allowed to use and then list a simple definition in natural language on what Panksepp means by these words if the meaning deviates from the meaning which an average person would take the words to mean.

SB_UK
04-23-16, 03:19 PM
SB_UK and other members interested. Would you be willing to have a discussion using a biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp to differentiate between bottom-up affection and top-down cognition, in regards to origin and treatment?
m


It's ard to be sure if the 'top down' 'bottom up' idea has anything to do with the image that you have attached in this thread.

If so the model is of

cognition
reward system
emotion

and I'm suggesting that

reward system
can be
give
or
take

In the scheme

cognition
|
v

^
|
reward system can be GIVE or TAKE
|
v

^
|
emotion

Dependent on Reward system - ADHD becomes a

social environment / adult indoctrinated dysfunctional
middle [TAKE] - top - down - middle [TAKE] - top
interaction with a
child (then under process of indoctrination)
middle [TAKE] - top - down - middle [TAKE] - top

The basic problem is the nature of the reward system
Shift from TAKE to GIVE and all downstream problems are remedied.

-*-

Why does TAKE reward system lead to ADH disorder ?
Because it doesn't activate our reward systems

I can't understand why the entire world are so fixated on having stuff when they're all about to die.
Shortly after birth we ALL die.
There's something much more important than having a house and a car for you to be worrying about.
You're supposed to be worried about how to live your life in a way that it meets with the underlying evolutionary / creationary program.

We are 'GIVE' oriented and so become disordered in a social/adult/child environment where 'TAKE' reward system is in control.

-*-

I don't know if any of these words have any bearing on any of what Panksepp has suggested.

SB_UK
04-23-16, 03:38 PM
I never read LILA (prob will soon, as I've been looking for some summer reading material), but Zen was also a phenomenal book. It must have been over 20 years ago when I read it, but the central theme has stuck in mind to this day. My half baked interpretation of it is that somewhere along the way, humans divorced philosophy/morality from science, the basis of which is now cemented in our very language. The original meaning of what "good" means was lost. In it's place has come a system of naming and categorizing (Aristotle) which had yielded unprecedented scientific breakthroughs, however the plot is still lost. Its probably more relevant today than when it was written....

Also intrinsic in the works of Pirsig are Quality.

The science of the Markram's or 'sensitivity' can be seen to be the evolutionary analogue of quality.

The world hasn't become any more intricate.

We have.

The basis for this is not a mystical 'metaphysics'

- but a simple

learning -
- development of a neutal network representing increasing sensitivity in
a
cortical (sensory) - cerebellar - cotrical (motor) loop

- from which personal quality arises.

Quality is synonymous with Sensitivity.

And I believe that we're close to defining ADHD as HSP.

Highly Sensitive People traumatized by an Insensitive world.

-*-

The lead author on the findings in sensitivity - a husband and wife team are currently the most prominent pairing in mainstream science - being the creators of the Frontiers (50 or so scientific journals) which are now a part of the mighty Nature empire.

mildadhd
04-23-16, 07:49 PM
I will be back when I finish.


:)

mildadhd
04-24-16, 12:46 AM
Hi SB_UK

After thinking about it, it occurred to me that your not interested in affective neuroscience, and the biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp.

I don't want to twist anyone's arm and I am really only interested in discussing the topics with people who are interested.

Cross-Species Affective Neuroscience Decoding of the Primal Affective Experiences of Humans and Related Animals

Jaak Panksepp



m

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:17 AM
LILA

wikiP

Lila can be loosely translated as the noun "play".

PLAY

The concept of Lila is common to both non-dualist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism) and dualist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism) philosophical (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_philosophy) schools, but has a markedly different significance in each.

Within non-dualism, Lila is a way of describing all reality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality), including the cosmos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos), as the outcome of creative play by the underlying noumenological creative impulse.

In the dualistic schools, Lila refers to the activities of the underlying noumenological creative impulse.

-*-

Pirsig function [verb] and form [noun]

-*-

Lila represents the unrelenting pressure for a creative impulse to drive an exponential pattern of informational entropy in the manifest (phenomenological) Universe.
Evolution represents an 'unknowable' determinism since although deterministic - the exponential increase in informational entropy represents the emergence of a subsequent evolutionary property which is by definition unimaginable to the species about to undergo emergence.

Emergence occurs when a species forms.
It involves the generation of a species by 3 polar bonds and the structure when complete is held together by 1 non-polar bond (the social impulse) - this explains the 4 forces of physics, 4 forces of chemistry and 4 forces of social structure.

Pirsig's quality represents an evolution in our quality sensing capacity - since only when we recognize increased informational complexisty can increased complexity be said to occur - this is the nature of consciousness - we require something to be conscious of and then something to be conscious of it.

Lila - also means beauty
beauty = quality

The term metaphysics is misleading - chemistry (Pirsig's previous major) is metaphysics.

What we're looking at in 'quality' is meta(physical world).

-*-

This set of ideas will become complex and so to summarise



Evolution works to create greater complexity in the manifest world.
Our current task is to develop personally/collectively greater quality in every sense of the word.
This requires us to shift from the 'take' reward system to the 'give' reward system such that the human mind develops towards knowing consistent with morality.

In actual fact - development of the mind towards 'knowing consistent with morality' drives a transition from the 'take' (default) to the 'give' reward system.
And so the broad-sense educational experience ie not just school but every social environmental context in which a child is placed in should re-inforce 'give' as the honourable choice.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:39 AM
Hi SB_UK

After thinking about it, it occurred to me that your not interested in affective neuroscience, and the biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp.

I don't want to twist anyone's arm and I am really only interested in discussing the topics with people who are interested.

m

[1] Is it possible to list the language (specific words) which Panksepp uses ?and
[2] the intended meaning of the words in [1] ?
[3] And why his idea [1,2] sheds light on ADHD which we must understand in order to overcome the condition ?

It's just that what you want us to do is discuss using somebody else's language and it's going to take considerable time to absorb the Panksepp worldview such that it can be translated into natural language.

Once it's translated into natural language - it'll be clear to the readership here - whether what Panksepp is offering is of any use.

We all have time constraints and it's difficult to know how to react when asked to discuss {insert author} and his views on {something} ?

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:44 AM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Panksepp+j

There are 266 papers on pubmed.

[1] Can you find just 1 that we can access and provide a link
[2] List out what he's saying in simple language in that paper which is important
[just 1 sentence will do]
[3] And why it's useful ie why it's worthy of discussing on an ADD forum
[just 1 sentence will do]
[4] And why it's different to anything that anybody else has said. ie ie it a game-changer ? ie some new way of overcoming ADHD ?
[just 1 sentence will do]

If you'd like - I don't mind if you compress the answers to 2, 3 and 4 into 1 sentence.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:52 AM
Integrating bottom-up internalist views of emotional feelings with top-down externalist views: might brain affective changes constitute reward and punishment effects within animal brains?

Panksepp J (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Panksepp%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24909739)1.
This paper sounds similar to the nature of this thread and represents the precise basis to my responses to this thread.

The middle - top - down - middle reference.

No you're not discussing this - you keep mentioning middle.
Middle is the reward/punishment mentioned in the title.

Top - cognitive as you've/Panksepp defined previously
Bottom - emotional as you've/Panksepp have defined previusly

-*-

What more is there to say ?

I believe that we've exhausted the Panksepp world-view.
He's not wrong - but what more is there to say ?

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:55 AM
Will better psychiatric treatments emerge from top-down or bottom-up neuroscientific studies of affect?

Panksepp J (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Panksepp%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24890060)1.

No - you must concentrate on the middle for top-down and bottom-up to correct.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:57 AM
Oxytocin sharpens self-other perceptual boundary.
Colonnello V1, Chen FS, Panksepp J, Heinrichs M.We've covered this extensively under the subjects of autism, pair-bonding in experimental animals, the posterior HPA axis, autism treatment.
Yes - it's an important part of social bond formation.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 03:00 AM
SEEKING and depression in stroke patients: an exploratory study.
Farinelli M1, Panksepp J, Gestieri L, Leo MR, Agati R, Maffei M, Leonardi M, Northoff G.Yes - it's generally well recognized that depressed individuals display lethargy (reduced SEEKing) preference.

We've covered this recently.

This is too diffcult - is there anything in any of these papers which is useful ?

SB_UK
04-24-16, 03:07 AM
The "id" knows more than the "ego" admits: neuropsychoanalytic and primal consciousness perspectives on the interface between affective and cognitive neuroscience.
Solms M (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Solms%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24962770)1, Panksepp J (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Panksepp%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24962770)2.
This is absolutely correct - but we've covered it many times over.

In a kind of spooky experiment, scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences reveal that our decisions are made seconds before we become aware of them.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 03:30 AM
http://ipn.vetmed.wsu.edu/people/faculty-ipn/panksepp-j
Jaak Panksepp, Ph.D.

Research

Our present research is devoted to the analysis of the neuroanatomical and neurochemical mechanisms of emotional behaviors (in the emerging fields of affective and social neurosciences), with a focus on understanding how various affective processes are evolutionarily organized in the brain, and looking for linkages to psychiatric disorders and drug addiction. From looking through the titles of 50 - 100 of Panksepp's papers he has a bent towards

panksepp key interest 1
evolution of emotions to currrent state in man -> what they do to the brain in man
but also
panksepp key interest 2
social nature -> what it does to the brain in man
and also
panksepp key interest 3
factors -> that lead to addiction -> what that does to the brain in man

So - attempting to link the entire point of Panksepp into 1 simple diagram

WHAT WE THINK - COGNITIVE [3ry]
^
RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIP
v
HOW WE ARE REWARDED [2ry] - GIVE (SOCIAL) panksepp key interest 2 OR TAKE panksepp key interest 3
^
RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIP panksepp key interest 1
v
EMOTIONS [1ry] FELT


So - the entire body of Panksepp's work fits into the simple scheme above.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 03:39 AM
Now explaining the entire idea in plain English


A private doctor or any doctor who earns money (greater than the national minimum wage) obtains reward [2ry] when he gets money
|
v
The doctor likes as many sick people as possible and so ensures (builds their own (the doctor's) mind [3ry])in such a way that more people are diagnosed as sick and when they're seen are told that they need frequent attention by the physician (because they're paid per hour)
|
v
The doctor [1ry] is happy and buys nice cars, houses and holidays.
panksepp key interest 1
|
v
Private doctor or any doctor who earns money (greater than the national minimum wage) want MORE (see physiological neuroendocrine homeostatic negative feedback) money obtains reward [2ry] when he gets money (and so the addiction begins)(see physiological neuroendocrine homeostatic negative feedback) ie TOLERANCE (NEEDING MORE TO ELICIT THE SAME EFFECT)
panksepp key interest 3

--- THE RING CYCLE --- encircles.

It follows the struggles of ... over the eponymous magic ring that grants domination over the entire world. The drama and intrigue continue through[OUT] until the final cataclysm
when he greedy, nasty, vicious, grasping, private clinician dies a sordid death desperately trying to take his gold with him into the afterworld. (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FXpF3SUFaDw/maxresdefault.jpg)

He didn't buy a stairway to Heaven - sadly (for him) quite the opposite.

Note pointed absence of
panksepp key interest 2
in the scheme above.

-*-

The above description is so simple that even a 5 year old should be able to understand it.

It describes:
-- Panksepp's 3 key interests taken from his WSU website
-- Uses Panksepp's 3 levels ([1ry] [2ry] [3ry]) taken from this thread

I'm not sure how much more you need.

mildadhd
04-24-16, 05:25 AM
SB_UK

In what posts where you discussing affective and cognitive, using the biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp?

Your view seems to be affective or cognitive leaning heavily toward cognitive, not unified affective and cognitive dimensional view?

This link article provides examples of quotes to draw from the evidence based terminology recommended by Jaak Panksepp.


http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021236

http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg



m

SB_UK
04-24-16, 05:54 AM
SB_UK

In what posts where you discussing affective and cognitive, using the biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp?

Your view seems to be affective or cognitive leaning heavily toward cognitive, not unified affective and cognitive dimensional view?

This link article provides examples of quotes to draw from the evidence based terminology recommended by Jaak Panksepp.


http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021236

http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg



m

The whole point of the last series of posts was COMPLETELY unified cognitive and affective ?

There's something very very serious going on here as it looks as if the simplest of ideas are being misinterpreted.

How can you not have a unified affective <-> cognitive system if there's circular / reciprocal causation ?

SB_UK
04-24-16, 05:59 AM
The issue of whether other animals have internally felt experiences has vexed animal behavioral science since its inception. Although most investigators remain agnostic on such contentious issues, there is now abundant experimental evidence indicating that all mammals have negatively and positively-valenced emotional networks concentrated in homologous brain regions that mediate affective experiences when animals are emotionally aroused. That is what the neuroscientific evidence indicates.


But this is simple - you've started numerous threads which make the point that they do.

And that the very same emotions are the ones that we have.

But we've additional (higher) but connected levels of control.

Why would you want to discuss it any further ?

Animals have 1ry <- you have called this genetic
Mammals have 2ry <- you have called this epigenetic <- which I don't think you mean involves either genomic methylation or othe similar or histone acetylation or other similar modifications
Humans have 3ry <- you have called this epigenetic <- which I don't think you mean involves either genomic methylation or othe similar or histone acetylation or other similar modifications

SB_UK
04-24-16, 06:00 AM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Panksepp+j

There are 266 papers on pubmed.

[1] Can you find just 1 that we can access and provide a link
[2] List out what he's saying in simple language in that paper which is important
[just 1 sentence will do]
[3] And why it's useful ie why it's worthy of discussing on an ADD forum
[just 1 sentence will do]
[4] And why it's different to anything that anybody else has said. ie ie it a game-changer ? ie some new way of overcoming ADHD ?
[just 1 sentence will do]

If you'd like - I don't mind if you compress the answers to 2, 3 and 4 into 1 sentence.

I promise I'll try to give you an answer if you can write 1 sentence answering the above - with the sentence hyperlinked with the reference which explains points 2 - 4.

I'm only asking for 1 sentence.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 06:05 AM
Red is genetic. Green and Blue are epigenetic.


You've already described all of that in this thread.


Animals have 1ry <- you have called this genetic
Mammals have 2ry <- you have called this epigenetic <- which I don't think you mean involves either genomic methylation or othe similar or histone acetylation or other similar modifications
Humans have 3ry <- you have called this epigenetic <- which I don't think you mean involves either genomic methylation or othe similar or histone acetylation or other similar modifications

I'm trying to find out what it is that you think we need to understand.
Otherwise it's a bit like trying to study a random word chosen from the dictionary in an ADD forum until we get nowhere, and everybody gives up.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 06:20 AM
conclusions

Brain scientists can evoke powerful emotional responses by localized ESB applied to distinct brain regions, similar across all mammalian species ever tested. At least 7 types of emotional arousal can be so evoked, and we refer to the underlying systems with a special nomenclature—SEEKING, RAGE, FEAR, LUST, CARE, PANIC/GRIEF and PLAY.
These subcortical structures are homologous among all mammals that have been tested. If one arouses the FEAR system, all species studied exhibit similar highly negative emotional responses with differences, of course, in species-typical details.
All of these basic emotional urges, from FEAR to social PLAY, remain intact after radical neo-decortication early in life; thus, the neocortex is not essential for the generation of primary-process emotionality.
ESB evoked emotional arousals are not psychologically neutral, since all can serve as ‘rewards’ and ‘punishments’ in motivating learning; such affective preferences are especially well indexed by conditioned place preferences and place aversions as well as by animals' eagerness to turn such ESBs on or off.
Comparably localized ESB of human brains yield congruent affective experiences—felt emotional arousals that typically appear without reason. In concert with the animal data, this provides robust evidence for emotional experiences in animals exhibiting primary species-typical (instinctual) emotional arousals, and suggests a dual-aspect monism strategy whereby instinctual emotional behavior sequences can serve as proxies for emotional feelings in animals.

Comments

1- Emotions represent activation of specific brain centres - not controversial
2- Absolutely unsurprising by virtue of evolution
3- You've made this point over many times - it's not controversial and simply represents its emergence at an early stage in evolution
4- Reward and Punishment alter learning - this has to be true - if an animal tastes something bad it must remember what it looked like and if it tastes something good - then remember both what it looks like and where it found the foodstuff.
5- Is this different from [2,3] ie if evolutionarily conserved then wouldn't you expect this

-*-

All of this is just a deeper exploration of the emotion.

None of it is surprising.

None of it is controversial.

Where do you want to take this idea ?

SB_UK
04-24-16, 06:53 AM
Do you think that because we're emotionally dysregulated that we're broken in some brain centre which (since emotional centres are evolutionarily conserved) can be located either in man or in animal ?

Because that idea is completely thrown out by a model which defines emotional dysregulation [1ry level dysfunction] as a side-effect of making the wrong 2ry level choice - impacting 3ry level construction.

It's ALL reward system.

Brain-dead human beings who desire money, power - doctors, lawyers, politicians
And
Emotionally unstable individuals - most likely doctors, lawyers and politicians (from the ones I know)

are BROKEN

because they've chosen the wrong reward system.

It's easy.

See my example above of the private doctor who wants as much disease as possible, the lawyer who wants as much discord, the dentist who wants as much dental decay, the politician who wants as much nationalism ETC ETC ETC

It's ALL reward system.

You've a choice (we all do) - and nobody in this current society has the wherewithall to make the right choice.

You know that you have made the correct choice in reward system (GIVE/MORALITY/WISDOM) when you express a violently aversive reaction to EVERYTHING to do with money.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 06:57 AM
POST-EDIT FOR CLARITY

conclusions

Brain scientists can evoke powerful emotional responses by localized ESB applied to distinct brain regions, similar across all mammalian species ever tested. At least 7 types of emotional arousal can be so evoked, and we refer to the underlying systems with a special nomenclature—SEEKING, RAGE, FEAR, LUST, CARE, PANIC/GRIEF and PLAY.
These subcortical structures are homologous among all mammals that have been tested. If one arouses the FEAR system, all species studied exhibit similar highly negative emotional responses with differences, of course, in species-typical details.
All of these basic emotional urges, from FEAR to social PLAY, remain intact after radical neo-decortication early in life; thus, the neocortex is not essential for the generation of primary-process emotionality.
ESB evoked emotional arousals are not psychologically neutral, since all can serve as ‘rewards’ and ‘punishments’ in motivating learning; such affective preferences are especially well indexed by conditioned place preferences and place aversions as well as by animals' eagerness to turn such ESBs on or off.
Comparably localized ESB of human brains yield congruent affective experiences—felt emotional arousals that typically appear without reason. In concert with the animal data, this provides robust evidence for emotional experiences in animals exhibiting primary species-typical (instinctual) emotional arousals, and suggests a dual-aspect monism strategy whereby instinctual emotional behavior sequences can serve as proxies for emotional feelings in animals.

Comments

1- Emotions represent activation of specific brain centres - not controversial
2- Absolutely unsurprising by virtue of evolution
3- You've made this point over many times - it's not controversial and simply represents emotion's early-stage (relatively) evolutionary emergence.
4- Reward and Punishment alter learning - this has to be true - if an animal tastes something bad it must remember what it looked like and if it tastes something good - then remember both what it looks like and where it found the foodstuff.
5- Is this different from [2,3] ie if evolutionarily conserved then wouldn't you expect it to be just so ?

-*-

All of this ^^ is just a deeper exploration of the emotion.

None of it is surprising.

None of it is controversial.

Where do you want to take this idea ?

SB_UK
04-24-16, 07:12 AM
If anything - this entire subject is a perfect scientifically water-tight validation of VEGANism.

Not that fat brain-dead zombiefied doctors, lawyers, politicians will be open to the science, to doing the right thing, to working towards a just world, to eradicating poverty, to ensuring a healthy global population.

All they want is it all for themselves.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 07:23 AM
Actually much more so - Panksepp's work wipes out all of this too -

The abuse of animals as pets
The abuse of animals in sports eg greyhound racing
The abuse of animals in generating food
The abuse of animals for use as food
The destruction of natural habitats for housing, raw materials
The destruction of ecosystems

Human beings simply destroy and abuse EVERYTHING.

ALL of it ^^^ is invalidated by Panksepp's research.

-*-

Is this where you want the thread to go ? because I don't mind slamming ALL animal abuse.

And yes - it's always stupid human beings with more money than sense.


It's money, stupid

SB_UK
04-24-16, 07:39 AM
Of course.

And back to the early days of genetics when 'rich' people considered themselves better than the poor.


Panksepp's research on emotions unequivocally states that rich and poor alike HAVE emotions.

And so when you're watching someone suffering - they're feeling just as bad as you would.

They're no different just because they're poor.

They'er not somehow immune to emotional suffering.

mildadhd
04-24-16, 12:34 PM
Affective (genetic) and Cognitive (epigenetic)


http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg

http://emotionresearcher.com/the-emotional-brain/panksepp/

SB_UK

Morality is blue.

Primary affects are red.

The foundation of behavior is red, not green or blue.

The primary level (red) and secondary level (green) mature before the tertiary level (blue), in early implicit life before the age of 3.

I am focusing on the early (red and green) preverbal implicit critical period of development, because it occurs before the verbal explicit critical period of development, after the age of 3.

Before the age of 3 is also most environmentally influential stage of emotion-self-regulation.

ADHD is often described as a lack of emotional-self-regulation.



m

mildadhd
04-24-16, 12:48 PM
SB_UK, we keep talking passed each other, because we are focusing on different brain processing levels.

(And sometimes different stages/ages of development)

I think learning the affective neuroscientific language recommended by Jaak Panksepp, would help us better communicate about bottom-up "affective and cognitive" (BrainMind), and top-down "cognitive and affective" (MindBrain), in general.






m

mildadhd
04-24-16, 01:02 PM
If we promote healthy emotional development before age of 3, we automatically promote healthy moral development after the age of 3.







m

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:08 PM
Panksepp's actual contribution to humanity
(https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0ahUKEwiTruLV4KfMAhVJPBoKHSmOBs0QFgg1MAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bwcsa.co.za%2Ffiles%2FTHE%252 0USE%2520OF%2520RATS%2520IN%2520VIVISECTION(1).doc&usg=AFQjCNE8Hf2U9C7AdqtuUfB_hpH4Fx3j7w&sig2=7sbgpJa0Uz_8qzGVFYsejw&cad=rja)

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:14 PM
SB_UK

Morality is blue.

Primary affects are red.

The foundation of behavior is red, not green or blue.

The primary level (red) and secondary level (green) mature before the tertiary level (blue), in early implicit life before the age of 3.

I am focusing on the early (red and green) preverbal implicit critical period of development, because it occurs before the verbal explicit critical period of development, after the age of 3.

Before the age of 3 is also most environmentally influential stage of emotion-self-regulation.

ADHD is often described as a lack of emotional-self-regulation.



m



A healthy spade can be used to kill a baby.
Ahealthy spade can be used to plant a tree which will feed decent animals eg rats.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:19 PM
SB_UK, we keep talking passed each other, because we are focusing on different brain processing levels.

(And sometimes different stages/ages of development)

I think learning the affective neuroscientific language recommended by Jaak Panksepp, would help us better communicate about bottom-up "affective and cognitive" (BrainMind), and top-down "cognitive and affective" (MindBrain), in general.
m


Originally Posted by mildadhd http://www.addforums.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1804941#post1804941)
Hi SB_UK

After thinking about it, it occurred to me that your not interested in affective neuroscience, and the biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp.

I don't want to twist anyone's arm and I am really only interested in discussing the topics with people who are interested.

m
[1] Is it possible to list the language (specific words) which Panksepp uses ?and
[2] the intended meaning of the words in [1] ?
[3] And why his idea [1,2] sheds light on ADHD which we must understand in order to overcome the condition ?

It's just that what you want us to do is discuss using somebody else's language and it's going to take considerable time to absorb the Panksepp worldview such that it can be translated into natural language.

Once it's translated into natural language - it'll be clear to the readership here - whether what Panksepp is offering is of any use.

We all have time constraints and it's difficult to know how to react when asked to discuss {insert author} and his views on {something} ? __________________



.....

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:21 PM
If we promote healthy emotional development before age of 3, we automatically promote healthy moral development after the age of 3.
m



A healthy spade can be used to kill a baby.
A healthy spade can be used to plant a tree which will feed decent animals eg rats.

A healthy spade doesn't know what it'll grow up to be

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:23 PM
Categorically

schoolwork + workplace

are responsible for ADH DISORDER.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:28 PM
IT'S WHY THE EARLIEST DIAGNOSIS Age of adders is the first year they atend school.

We knew our kids had it before 1 yar of age.

the disorder comes when they're made to do something they cannot do

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:31 PM
imagine how a dog would feel if you gave it an increasing strength of electric shock each time it failed to read from a random book of your choosing

that's adh disorder

Socaljaxs
04-24-16, 01:52 PM
SB_UK and other members interested. Would you be willing to have a discussion using a biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp to differentiate between bottom-up affection and top-down cognition, in regards to origin and treatment?

I would be interested! If you like instead of asking just post the topic of interest... So this way once posted, see what happens!

If a member isn't interested in discussing this further, they have every right to just not contribute to it.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 01:55 PM
I'll try and be as simple as possible.

Healthy emotions = Primary level = Sharp Spade
Reward system = Secondary level = Good or Bad
Bad = feel reward when crush skull of baby
Good = feel reward when plant a tree for nice animals (not humans) to eat from
Cognitive level - Tertiary level =
if influenced by Bad = How do I get into maternity units when there's nobody around ?
if influenced by Good = Where is the best soil to plant tree x, tree y and tree z

Consequence of Cognitive Style Bad = Reward (Bad) = Emotion (good)
Consequence of Cognitive Style Good = Reward (Good) = Emotion (good)

It doesn't matter whether it's reward (from good or bad act) - what matters is that it's reward that makes the individual happy (ie a rewarding pursuit)

In both cases the primary level is identical.

-*-

Now one more time.

It's the middle layer on the diagram - labelled 'wanting' which is the reward system

not bottom up or top down - but how the middle layer is defined by the school and the workplace.

-*-

I don't understand why you're looking at top down or bottom up - when middle out is a perfectly good other alternative

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:07 PM
Surely - by now after 15 years here - of near constant discussion about homeostasis - we should know by now that it's the balance point between too much and too little which is the desired equilibrium point -

or more to the point here -

that it's the middle part which is more often than not going to provide us with the clues to unravelling any biological phenomenon.

In this case it's not a precise recapitulation of the normal context for set-point - but it does also involve us needing to embrace the idea of 'centre'.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:10 PM
Here's another attempt.

In the image above - what is wanting ?
It's the reward system.

What do ADDers take ?
medication which activates the reward system

Why would anybody think anything other than that it's the middle of the scheme which is playing up in ADDers ?

What does that mean ?
That ADDers feel pain and need reward in a bottle when they're put in a fixed environment in which they cannot perform for some reason.

This is ADH disorder

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:15 PM
http://www.addforums.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1804816#post1804816) SB_UK and other members interested. Would you be willing to have a discussion using a biological language recommended by Jaak Panksepp to differentiate between bottom-up affection and top-down cognition, in regards to origin and treatment?
So the simple answers are
OK
OK
OK - NOT BOTTOM UP OR TOP DOWN BUT MIDDLE
OK - NEITHER BOTTOM UP OR TOP DOWN BUT MIDDLE WHERE THE DRUGS WE TAKE ACT

-*-

OK - so how do we change the choice at the middle stage ?

One final time - this is becoming tedious - getting to the point where I'm just going to copy and paste the same post now



To realise that the mind isn't a thing for sticking stuff in

But to realise that the mind is a thing for sticking morality in





2ry Middle layer then corrects.
2ry Middle out layers correct
So 1ry (<-doesn't functionally change) and 3ry levels (<- radically changes) correct post-2ry

There was never anything wrong with the 1ry level - it's just that it's activated positively upon positive social behaviours and negatively upon negative social behaviours rather than activated positively upon negative social behaviours* and negatively upon positively social behaviours** rather

* schadenfreude
** imprison refugees

The 1ry level is a sharp shovel.

SB_UK
04-24-16, 02:45 PM
AUGUST 2004

I've been repeating this idea for 12 years now with its originator

http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=88463&postcount=20

In brief a reward system which is activated/associated with morality

Greyhound1
04-24-16, 06:11 PM
**Thread Closed for Review**

Greyhound1
04-26-16, 10:14 PM
Thread is re-opened.

Cheers

mildadhd
04-27-16, 09:43 PM
Prof Panksepp has lots and lots of amazing work.

Example

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-admRGFVNM

mildadhd
04-27-16, 10:05 PM
SB_UK

How can we have a balanced discussion about affective consciousness and cognitive consciousness, if we just talk about cognitive consciousness?





m

SB_UK
04-28-16, 02:35 AM
affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective -----/\

affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective ---------- --------/\

affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective ----------/\

Which of the 3 images above are balanced ?
What is essential in balance ?

Is there a middle-point in the Panksepp image ?

Why is it labelled 'wanting' ?

What is 'wanting' ?

A reward system ?

A reward system which reflects a merger between individual [1ry] and collective wellbeing [3ry].

Don't need to talk about 1ry EOR 3ry but 2ry corrects 1ry and 2ry.

affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective ----------/\

Why is there anything else left to say ?

SB_UK
04-28-16, 05:25 AM
correction

quote=_;1806106
affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective -----/\

affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective ---------- --------/\

affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective ----------/\

which of the 3 images above are balanced ?
What is essential in balance ?

Is there a middle-point in the panksepp image ?

Why is it labelled 'wanting' ?

What is 'wanting' ?

A reward system ?

A reward system which reflects a merger between individual [1ry] and collective wellbeing [3ry].

Don't need to talk about 1ry EOR 3ry but 2ry corrects 1ry and 3ry.

Affective ---------- ---------- cognitive consciousness
affective ----------/\

why is there anything else left to say ?
/quote

SB_UK
04-28-16, 06:41 AM
Prof Panksepp has lots and lots of amazing work.

Example

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-admRGFVNM

Animals like other animals that are nice to them.
Human beings can be nice to other human beings if human beings acquire a mind.
The mind is not a thing to know stuff but is a thing to know morality.
When the mind knows morality then the human animal is nice to all other things.
And so Animals [will start to] like other animals [even human animals] that are [thereafter] nice to them.

mildadhd
04-28-16, 08:09 AM
morality is not in the middle either...morality is top down..

it is really important to differentiate between the BrainMind and MindBrain.

I want to include and discuss the secondary and tertiary topics of the MindBrain that you writing about, but we need to include the foundation of BrainMind and affective consciousness to understand the whole picture and development in early life.

I have been considering the affective neuroscientific terminology for a couple of years, and everyday I am learning new and exciting things, by considering from the bottom up and top down.

I have provided a link that includes all the terminology recommendations to distinguish between bottom up primary emotion and secondary emotion and tertiary emotion.

if it seems like I am ignoring you, I am not, I am going to discuss things in order of development, starting with the more mature red and green levels in the first years of life. Then blue.

development matures from the bottom-up, that is why I am starting from the bottom-up.




m

SB_UK
04-28-16, 01:30 PM
morality is not in the middle either...morality is top down..

it is really important to differentiate between the BrainMind and MindBrain.

I want to include and discuss the secondary and tertiary topics of the MindBrain that you writing about, but we need to include the foundation of BrainMind and affective consciousness to understand the whole picture and development in early life.

I have been considering the affective neuroscientific terminology for a couple of years, and everyday I am learning new and exciting things, by considering from the bottom up and top down.

I have provided a link that includes all the terminology recommendations to distinguish between bottom up primary emotion and secondary emotion and tertiary emotion.

if it seems like I am ignoring you, I am not, I am going to discuss things in order of development, starting with the more mature red and green levels in the first years of life. Then blue.

development matures from the bottom-up, that is why I am starting from the bottom-up.

m

1ry level only

Undoubtedly stress can have a dramatic effect on the developing ADDer (1ry).
Undoubtedly ADDers are sensitive to stress.
So - undoubtedly early stress will have an inordinate effect on the young ADDer.

I am willing to believe eg asthma, joint pain/physical inflexibility (in my case) from the age of 5 - that the sensitivity to stress can physically deform us.
^
|
This is an interesting idea.

There could be some connection here in ADDers to fast catch up growth ie disordered growth of the physical body too.
Tendency to grow excessively - skeletal problems ?

Is any of that what you want to discuss ?

SB_UK
04-28-16, 01:40 PM
http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html
In most cases, infants with IUGR ultimately have good outcomes, with a reported mortality rate of only 0.2 to 1 percent.1 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b1) These infants often exhibit fast catch-up growth in the first three months of life and attain normal growth curves by one year of age. Some early studies28 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b28),29 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b29) have found a variety of long-term complications in infants with IUGR. These complications include hyperactivity, clumsiness and poor concentration. Other studies30 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b30),31 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b31) have found growth-restricted infants to be at increased risk for development of hypertension, abdominal obesity and type 2 (non–insulin-dependent) diabetes as adults.You want to suggest that adhd is simply a disease state caused by ?

TABLE 1Conditions Associated with Intrauterine Growth Retardation

Medical
Chronic hypertension
Preeclampsia early in gestation
Diabetes mellitus
Systemic lupus erythematosus
Chronic renal disease
Inflammatory bowel disease
Severe hypoxic lung disease
Maternal
Smoking
Alcohol use
Cocaine use
Warfarin (Coumadin, Panwarfin)
Phenytoin (Dilantin)
Malnutrition
Prior history of pregnancy with intratuterine growth retardation
Residing at altitude above 5,000 feet
Infectious
Syphilis
Cytomegalovirus
Toxoplasmosis
Rubella
Hepatitis B
HSV-1 or HSV-2
HIV-1
Congenital
Trisomy 21
Trisomy 18
Trisomy 13
Turner's syndrome
http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html


We've covered this before - and it comes down to sensitivity (good thing) stressed by insensitivity (bad thing).

But I'm not sure if this is what you'd like ?

SB_UK
04-28-16, 01:55 PM
We've covered this before - and it comes down to sensitivity (good thing) stressed by insensitivity (bad thing).

Here's a mead823 thread which referenced this basic idea

http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29590&highlight=contextual

Anything useful from there ?

SB_UK
04-28-16, 02:05 PM
morality is not in the middle either...morality is top down.

middle out - top down

I'm defining morality as reward system transition prior to top down logical rational moral control.

Another way to put it might be that if we imagine a mind in a bottle - it is capable of immorality or morality - and it's middle out that defines whether
top down is moral -> 1ry level - HAPPY emotion
top down is immoral -> 1ry level - HAPPY emotion

mildadhd
04-28-16, 09:10 PM
Affective (genetic) and Cognitive (epigenetic)


http://emotionresearcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/three-levels.jpg

http://emotionresearcher.com/the-emotional-brain/panksepp/

I want to have a discussion which includes the primary foundation of the mind (red), secondary learning and memory (green), tertiary emotional-self-regulation and morality (blue).

In the order below from conception to adulthood.

Red, Green, Blue, Blue, Green, Red

Note middle-out would be Red-Green-Blue pre-executive bottom-up. (secondary-tertiary)

Red-Green-Blue-Blue-Green-Red

It is impossible to have Green or Blue, without Red consciousness.








m

SB_UK
04-28-16, 11:36 PM
http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html


In most cases, infants with IUGR ultimately have good outcomes, with a reported mortality rate of only 0.2 to 1 percent.1 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b1) These infants often exhibit fast catch-up growth in the first three months of life and attain normal growth curves by one year of age. Some early studies28 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b28),29 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b29) have found a variety of long-term complications in infants with IUGR. These complications include hyperactivity, clumsiness and poor concentration. Other studies30 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b30),31 (http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/1015/p1384.html#afp19981015p1384-b31) have found growth-restricted infants to be at increased risk for development of hypertension, abdominal obesity and type 2 (non–insulin-dependent) diabetes as adults. Closer ??

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors are altered in pathologies of the human placenta: gestational diabetes mellitus, intrauterine growth restriction and preeclampsia.

->


Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1806344&postcount=3

->

Summary
Maternal nutrition

mildadhd
04-28-16, 11:50 PM
Nevermind




m

SB_UK
04-28-16, 11:53 PM
So - still is ADHD merely a disorder ?

No - the maternal nutrition thing simply represents the first distressor to the developing embryo.
The first of many distresses to the developing sensitive.

Can be argued that ADHD is HSP suffering some level (so many of these) of env distress - occurring from Day 1 - onwards.

Diagnostic criteria of ADHD are incorrect - can tell ADD status from birth.
Don't need to wait till 5.

Parents can tell.

ADHD symptoms reduce as age.

Why ? reduced distress after leaving education.

Expectations on kids before they're ready - underlying ADD disorder.

mildadhd
04-28-16, 11:56 PM
Take Care.





m

SB_UK
04-28-16, 11:56 PM
Nevermind




m
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_emotion

better ??

SB_UK
04-29-16, 12:05 AM
http://emotionresearcher.com/the-emotional-brain/panksepp/

Read this again - it all sounds right ?

How can it be discussed ?

Is there something there that you think is wrong ?

SB_UK
04-29-16, 06:44 AM
How about this ?

A Panksepp document ?

Is there something here that you don't agree with ?

It all seems OK ?

http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf

SB_UK
04-29-16, 06:53 AM
I have provided a link that includes all the terminology recommendations to distinguish between bottom up primary emotion and secondary emotion and tertiary emotion.


You want to question whether each of the 3 levels of the structure are best considered emotional in nature ?

Yes - a large part of what I'm suggesting is that the point in life is to be happy.

And so no problem with that idea ?

Closer ??

SB_UK
04-29-16, 06:54 AM
everyday I am learning ... exciting things

Can you list a few of them ?

SB_UK
04-29-16, 09:40 AM
OK - this time I've it.

You're trying to identify the evolution of consciousness in its instantiation in life (with brain) as emotion - and so sensitivity to emotion (the ADDer) as a newly emergent form.

That's definitely it.

Using consciousness in this sense


Perhaps the most difficult, and at the same time the most interesting problem in neuroscience, is the nature of consciousness and its relationship to physical events in the brain. Until a moderate number of years ago, this topic was avoided by neuroscientists, with the honourable exception of Sir John Eccles. He had been brought up as a Catholic and believed in the existence of a soul in each individual. In contrast, this has now become a fashionable topic, with several societies and journals devoted to it. It seems to me that this is the biggest problem facing neuroscience at the present time. Whoever solves it will have earned a place in the history of science comparable to that of Newton and Darwin. A related problem is whether any non-human animals are conscious. My own guess is that all mammals are conscious, and very likely all vertebrates and possibly some invertebrates, especially squids and octopuses, but I know that several highly reputable neuroscientists hold the belief that only Man is conscious.
http://www.neuroscience.cam.ac.uk/about/intro/

SB_UK
04-29-16, 09:44 AM
Now making sense.

The nature of evolution as an evolution in consciousness.

What is consciousness ?
At its simplest level - it's
something to be noticed <- something to notice
receptor <- ligand

female archetype <- male archetype
= duality

with a structure formed from scaling the archetype bond
- giving rise to a completed structure - a 'tertiary' which becomes a unitary structure -
the social impulse holds that structure in place.

Understanding of context (last stage of evolution)
gives rise to
'quality' <- ADHD [HSP] <- a newly emergent species.

SB_UK
04-29-16, 09:47 AM
Which is why Stephen Hawking was at the Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness.

Stephen Hawking, Churchill College (the experience of unconsciousness :rolleyes:), Crick, Koch, Panksepp and Huxley.

^
|
That'd be a masterclass

SB_UK
04-29-16, 09:52 AM
Certainty now -

emergence of a new species

emergence in consciousness

However - different dietary needs (quality), sensory needs (quality), communication needs (quality)

systematizing
sensory
empathizing

-*-

- Problem -
Novel metabolic state - disruption on maternal diet -> IUGR similarity to ADHD - ADHD precedes (sensitivity) - maternal stress/diet then kicks off the start of persistent disorder.

- Solution -
SCFA (soluble fibre), MUFA, a good omega-3 : omega-6 ratio - happens naturally with greens.

Fat (mitochondria) win.

Pure vegan - satisfies the need to protect animals -
declaration of consciousness - but seriously - just befriend a dog and you'll know his/her capacity for emotional states.

mildadhd
04-30-16, 12:11 PM
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021236



Read the link above for start.

We must include emotional-affective neuroscientific terminology in the discussions. (Capitalized 7 primary unconditioned emotional response systems for example) to understand affective neuroscience and cognitive neuroscience.




m