![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A friend of mine died today.
Dec. 25th, 2012 10:52 amHe was 68 years old. He died in hospice of melanoma, which was discovered last year in his brain. He never recognized the skin lesion. He was one of my original paddling buddies here in Portland, a retired engineer and a budding Buddhist. He loved his wife and their home by the Washougal river, where he could watch osprey and otters. His hospice bed was at home, turned so that he could see the river flowing by. He was headstrong and didn't enjoy dysfunctional group dynamics, hence was apt to simply leave behind river groups he didn't feel like dealing with. He softened after his diagnosis. I wish his wife and family well in this difficult time. Holidays for them will forevermore bring up the memory of he who they lost on this day. His name was Dick Sisson. A candle burns for him here, and his memory is held with love and respect.
In the process of googling various symbols that might be developed into a logo for my medical practice (I was studying on the rod of Aesclepius vs the rampant American confusion with the Caduceus) I ran across a blog that is distinctly American right wing Christian conservative in nature. The image that drew me in was this so-called "Obama Screw-U", which is derived from the Caduceus symbolizing treachery and profiteering:
That was humorous, but not exactly fair or kind. After a bit more surfing I found an article on Leftwing Pathology that posits that left wingers are essentially psychopathic. I will bypass the commentary on this page because in general it is name calling and not productive. But I do see how this is completely true from the conservative perspective.
Conservatism, most basically, is a limbic or mammalian mindedness emphasizing deep emotional connections, visceral aversions, and a strong instinctive sense of rightness vs wrongness. Liberalism is neocortical, involving the ability to weigh conflicting theories and integrate disparate data. To conservatives, liberals are immoral, or even psychopathic because they don't act from their hearts and guts. Liberals think about it, and make decisions based on information. The liberal method doesn't appreciate the power of people's personal attachments and belief systems. It hurts people's feelings. To the liberal, conservatives are dimwits who can't think rationally about anything. Of course the conservatives feel that they are the rational ones, they just consider different things to constitute "information".
It's about as bad as trying to get Israelis and Palestinians to talk to each other.
Conservatives feel a great deal more emotional pain when they are asked to act contrary to their own values. Liberals are expert at rationalizing--or neocorticalizing, if you will. Liberals are capable of acting more like a psychopath and being indifferent to pain both inside and around them.
But there's a spectrum. Some people are nearer the middle between emotional/instinctive/believing and intellectual/rationalizing/skeptical. Some can see both sides. Our limbic systems are intact and we can love deeply and hold values that matter, at the same time that our neocortices are developed enough to see that sometimes fairness that hurts is better in the long run than unfairness that feels safe and good. Maybe we could spend a little more time and energy trying to understand and be human to each other. We may not be able to develop policy that satisfies the deeply held attachments of conservatives, but we can at least acknowledge when the situation calls for deeply painful compromise, and try to be kind. The liberal who can't understand conservatives is more foolish than the conservative that can't understand liberals.
That was humorous, but not exactly fair or kind. After a bit more surfing I found an article on Leftwing Pathology that posits that left wingers are essentially psychopathic. I will bypass the commentary on this page because in general it is name calling and not productive. But I do see how this is completely true from the conservative perspective.
Conservatism, most basically, is a limbic or mammalian mindedness emphasizing deep emotional connections, visceral aversions, and a strong instinctive sense of rightness vs wrongness. Liberalism is neocortical, involving the ability to weigh conflicting theories and integrate disparate data. To conservatives, liberals are immoral, or even psychopathic because they don't act from their hearts and guts. Liberals think about it, and make decisions based on information. The liberal method doesn't appreciate the power of people's personal attachments and belief systems. It hurts people's feelings. To the liberal, conservatives are dimwits who can't think rationally about anything. Of course the conservatives feel that they are the rational ones, they just consider different things to constitute "information".
It's about as bad as trying to get Israelis and Palestinians to talk to each other.
Conservatives feel a great deal more emotional pain when they are asked to act contrary to their own values. Liberals are expert at rationalizing--or neocorticalizing, if you will. Liberals are capable of acting more like a psychopath and being indifferent to pain both inside and around them.
But there's a spectrum. Some people are nearer the middle between emotional/instinctive/believing and intellectual/rationalizing/skeptical. Some can see both sides. Our limbic systems are intact and we can love deeply and hold values that matter, at the same time that our neocortices are developed enough to see that sometimes fairness that hurts is better in the long run than unfairness that feels safe and good. Maybe we could spend a little more time and energy trying to understand and be human to each other. We may not be able to develop policy that satisfies the deeply held attachments of conservatives, but we can at least acknowledge when the situation calls for deeply painful compromise, and try to be kind. The liberal who can't understand conservatives is more foolish than the conservative that can't understand liberals.
Tags:
Unconscious Thought Theory
Oct. 19th, 2012 10:30 amLast night while at a Sierra Club meeting involving the effort to hasten decommission of the Columbia Generating Station (nuke at Hanford), I started having all manner of thoughts about my book on homeopathy. I brainstormed my intro and some chapter ideas on the same page where I'd taken a few notes about newly understood seismic activity in the Tri-Cities area, the power needed to make fuel rods, the types of nuclear waste storage currently in use, and such. Part of what brought homeopathy to mind was the groupthink in evidence among the meeting attendees. The anti-nuke information being conveyed was at times not even faintly believable, but the group assumed that all present were on board with the effort to eliminate nuclear power from our bevy of power sources.
This morning in my inbox I find an interesting article by Art Markman on the question of what kind of creativity we display while our conscious minds are occupied with something else. It appears that for simple decisions, it's better to think about consciously it, however for complex issues it may be good to be distracted from the direct question. Dijksterhuis and Nordgren presented Unconscious Thought Theory (UTT) in this paper. Another paper by Haiyang Yang et al shows that the duration of unconscious thought has an inverted-U shaped relationship with creativity, suggesting that unconscious thought may outperform conscious for moderate-length deliberations.
So for quick decisions tis best to focus on the matter at hand. For very long and complex deliberations, there might be time for both conscious and unconscious contemplation. And to harness the power of unconscious synthesis thinking, one needs a moderate amount of time in which to do it.
I've heard of UTT before but not by name. I generally have my best ideas while walking, which suggests to me that cross-crawl integration of walking may bring the two brain halves to apply their knowledge to whatever problem is at hand. I've seen the process modeled extensively by television character Dr House. House plays ball, drives bumper cars, or does pranks on his coworkers to distract himself from the burning questions, and allow his unconscious mind to sort out the myriad details of a medical case and arrive at a diagnosis and treatment. People may think that he is goofing off, but in fact it is physical play that brings his most astounding ideas to the fore. He starts with the conscious brainstorming with the help of his team, then goes off to do whatever activity life presents, then returns to the conscious cogitation. The science is beginning to support the use of this technique for creative decisionmaking.
This morning in my inbox I find an interesting article by Art Markman on the question of what kind of creativity we display while our conscious minds are occupied with something else. It appears that for simple decisions, it's better to think about consciously it, however for complex issues it may be good to be distracted from the direct question. Dijksterhuis and Nordgren presented Unconscious Thought Theory (UTT) in this paper. Another paper by Haiyang Yang et al shows that the duration of unconscious thought has an inverted-U shaped relationship with creativity, suggesting that unconscious thought may outperform conscious for moderate-length deliberations.
So for quick decisions tis best to focus on the matter at hand. For very long and complex deliberations, there might be time for both conscious and unconscious contemplation. And to harness the power of unconscious synthesis thinking, one needs a moderate amount of time in which to do it.
I've heard of UTT before but not by name. I generally have my best ideas while walking, which suggests to me that cross-crawl integration of walking may bring the two brain halves to apply their knowledge to whatever problem is at hand. I've seen the process modeled extensively by television character Dr House. House plays ball, drives bumper cars, or does pranks on his coworkers to distract himself from the burning questions, and allow his unconscious mind to sort out the myriad details of a medical case and arrive at a diagnosis and treatment. People may think that he is goofing off, but in fact it is physical play that brings his most astounding ideas to the fore. He starts with the conscious brainstorming with the help of his team, then goes off to do whatever activity life presents, then returns to the conscious cogitation. The science is beginning to support the use of this technique for creative decisionmaking.
Tags:
And that's just what we need to make the movie Idiocracy predictive. A recently published Harvard University meta-analysis funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has concluded that children who live in areas with highly fluoridated water have "significantly lower" IQ scores than those who live in low fluoride areas.
SOURCE
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/08/14/fluoride-effects-in-children.aspx?e_cid=20120814_DNL_artNew_1
SOURCE
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/08/14/fluoride-effects-in-children.aspx?e_cid=20120814_DNL_artNew_1
Tags:
The Capacity for Faith
Jul. 26th, 2012 07:32 pmI'm listening to an interview on NPR with an author (C. Beha) who is talking about the loss of his Catholic faith, and his subsequent exploration of the question of faith. (You can listen to it here: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=3&islist=true&id=13&d=07-26-2012) He appears to be drawing an equivalence between having faith, and having a personal experience of God. I think that this equivalence is mistaken. I do not have faith, and yet I have mystical experiences on a regular basis. I do not Believe that these experiences are God because I know that there are too many other explanations to be sure of that attribution. I remain agnostic: I've had and heard of no mystical experiences that cannot be explained by other phenomena, yet there could of course be a spirit manipulating it all. I suppose that puts me in the camp of the faithless.
Tags:
A new study shows that patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) do not progress to dementia if they drink enough coffee! Gotta love it. I'm going to start drinking a whole pot, by golly. The researchers in this study think that it's the caffeine, and not the anti-oxidants, that has the anti-dementia effect, but according to mouse studies, it has to be coffee. Those patients with a little MCI who java it up enough to have a plasma caffeine level of 1200ng/mL did not go into dementia. 100%. The caffeine appears to inhibit an enzyme used in the manufacture of beta amyloid! They're also tracking cytokines in the plasma and finding that there's a particular profile assorted with conversion to Alzheimer's disease (low IL-6, IL-10, and G-CSF). In the future we might consider testing for those cytokines to detect impending dementia in healthy patients.
( notes!! )
( notes!! )
Tags:
Left-Handed People Die Young
Jun. 13th, 2012 03:44 pmTYPES OF HANDEDNESS
Redirected handedness = learned handedness
Natural handedness = genetic or inherited
Pathological handedness = caused by brain injury or other pathology
( notes )
Redirected handedness = learned handedness
Natural handedness = genetic or inherited
Pathological handedness = caused by brain injury or other pathology
( notes )
QotD: Temples
May. 21st, 2012 10:27 amThis is my simple religion. There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophy... Our own brain, our own heart is our temple, the philosophy is kindness.
--the Dalai Lama
--the Dalai Lama
Neandertals
Apr. 14th, 2012 09:35 amTHE LAST NEANDERTHALS:
The Evolution and Extinction of a Species
April Nowell, PhD, is an archaeologist and associate professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Victoria
Since the discovery of the first Neanderthal remains in 1856 in Germany, this species has generated controversy: questions concerning their genetic relationship to modern humans, their capacity for language and artistic expression, and the reasons for their extinction. Learn about the latest research transforming our understanding of these ancient people.
( from my notes at the science pub the other day )
The Evolution and Extinction of a Species
April Nowell, PhD, is an archaeologist and associate professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Victoria
Since the discovery of the first Neanderthal remains in 1856 in Germany, this species has generated controversy: questions concerning their genetic relationship to modern humans, their capacity for language and artistic expression, and the reasons for their extinction. Learn about the latest research transforming our understanding of these ancient people.
( from my notes at the science pub the other day )
Word of the Day: Sapiosexual
Apr. 3rd, 2012 02:20 pmsapiosexual = one who is sexually attracted to intelligence in others
Using EFAs
Jan. 23rd, 2012 11:10 amClinical applications for EFAs
Tori Hudson, ND
Hosted by Nordic Naturals
( notes from lecture 1/23/12 )
Tori Hudson, ND
Hosted by Nordic Naturals
( notes from lecture 1/23/12 )
A new study has been published in the November issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry (Br J Psych. 2011;199:386-390). This is the first longitudinal study showing brain effects of marijuana; it reduces the volume of the thalamus in folks age 16-25 who are well but have a family history of schizophrenia. The reduction is greater on the right side.
( more notes )
( more notes )
Tags:
QotD: Freedom
Nov. 1st, 2011 11:02 amPeople demand freedom of speech
as a compensation for
the freedom of thought
which they seldom use.
-Kirkegaard
as a compensation for
the freedom of thought
which they seldom use.
-Kirkegaard
Tags:
This is a new finding. The earlier in life that the traumatic insult occurs, the greater the effect. The brain develops differently as a result, and there is a great chance of comorbidities. SOURCE: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/749564?src=mpnews&spon=12
Also interesting, the mortality gap between normal people and those with mental illness is getting larger. All current mental health efforts are not yet improving the odds of survival for those with bipolar and shizophrenia. SOURCE: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/749687?src=mpnews&spon=12
On managing aggressive schizophrenics: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/749195?src=mp&spon=12
Also interesting, the mortality gap between normal people and those with mental illness is getting larger. All current mental health efforts are not yet improving the odds of survival for those with bipolar and shizophrenia. SOURCE: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/749687?src=mpnews&spon=12
On managing aggressive schizophrenics: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/749195?src=mp&spon=12
A relationship that strays from one's prototype is limbically equivalent to isolation. Loneliness outweighs most pain. These two facts collude to produce one of love's common and initially baffling quirks: most people will choose misery with a partner their limbic brain recognizes over the stagnant pleasure of a "nice" relationship with someone their attachment mechanisms cannot detect.
from A General Theory of Love p161.
from A General Theory of Love p161.
Tags:
The new finding is that 10 year old children of persistently depressed mothers have larger amygdalas. This new finding makes me wonder.......about our society. But-- a little orientation for those of you who don't read about the brain all the time. The amygdala is part of the mammalian or limbic brain, and it is the part that helps us feel fear and loathing, instinctive attraction and lust, and mystical or religious experiences. In other words, the amygdala drives a whole lot of instinct and emotion, and is completely distinct from rational thought. Another recent study showed that political conservatives have bigger amygdalas, whereas political liberals have bigger frontal cortices. So my question is this: is our current generational swing to the right side of the politic spectrum due to a generation of depressed mothers? Or were these mothers inattentive for other reasons? Did the advent of television cause a rewiring of our brains on a population level? Just asking. What other factors could have caused a generational swing toward amygdalic dominance??
( (new article from medscape) )
( (new article from medscape) )
Tags:
