Corrie van Wijk
07-09-2007, 12:44 PM
Dear James,
Of all the qualities I admire in you, I didn’t know yet (I should have guessed though) about your ability to relate difficult neurobiological information to clean questioning. I remember our first dialogue on the subject of clean space, when we discussed the bottum-up process of knowledge emerging from orienting in and moving around space. So I am very pleased with your article ‘The Neurobiology of Space’ in which you select quotes from Eric R. Kandel’s book In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind (2007) which relate to the neurobiology of space perception. I strongly believe that understanding the neurobiological basis of our perception and memory is the key to understanding psychological problems and repair, solve or heal them, in order to grow a healthy sense of self.
So allow me to make some comments on the matter; I would be very pleased if you (or anyyou else) chose to react to them.
1. “As soon as the metaphor of a map is used it brings with it entailments of a map reader. But, according to current neuroscience, there is no map reader in the brain, just synchronised electrical and chemical reactions from which behaviour emerges. Thus the map Kandel refers to is not a map in the ordinary sense of the word, it is a configuration of neurons whose pattern of firing contributes to the animal being able to navigate round its environment.”
Since there is no map reader and the map is made by experience, based on genetic wiring, wouldn’t it be better to refer to it as an self-organized ‘landscape’? Victor Lamme (see the thread on quantum mechanics) used for neuronal pathways the metaphor of a mountain path, shaped by (repeated) use.
2. “The spatial map discovered by O'Keefe differs radically from the egocentric sensory maps for touch and vision, because it is not dependent on any given sensory modality. O'Keefe found that as an animal walks around an enclosure, some place cells fire action potentials only when that animal moves into a particular location, while others fire when the animal moves to another place. The brain breaks down its surroundings into many small, overlapping areas, similar to a mosaic, each represented by activity in specific cells in the hippocampus. This internal map of space develops within minutes of the rat's entrance into a new environment. (pp. 308-309)
"An analogue in Clean Space is the breaking down of a complex abstract issue into several small areas, each represented by a verbal or nonverbal description of knowledge. What is new (to us, at least) is the notion of overlapping spaces.” ( © 2007, James Lawley)
What’s the difference between moving around in real space, which by a combination of different sensory inputs (light, distance to another object, sound, smell, etc) may trigger memories of similar spaces (or more at the same time in case of an overlap) and events that took ‘place’ at the time, and a mapping out by the conscious brain of a problem, described in terms of language or symbols? It seems to me that the former is helpful because by association it helps reconnect unconscious or disassociated memories (repair), while the latter is more useful in solving cognitive (neo-cortex) problems. Or the first needs to give input for the latter to make sense of it.
3. “In The Principles of Psychology [1890] William James pointed out that there is more than one form of attention. There are at least two types: involuntary and voluntary. Involuntary attention is supported by automatic neural processes, and is particularly evident in implicit memory. Involuntary attention is activated by a property of the external world of the stimulus and it is captured, according to James, by "big things, bright things, moving things, or blood.
Voluntary attention, on the other hand, such as paying attention to the road and traffic while driving, is a specific feature of explicit memory and arises from the internal need to process stimuli that are not automatically salient. (p. 313)
One of the key differences between [involuntary and voluntary attention] is not the absence or presence of salience, but whether the signal of salience is perceived consciously. Studies also suggest that, as James had argued, the determining factor in whether memory is implicit or explicit is the manner in which the attentional signal for salience is recruited. (pp. 313-314)”
So when you are driving a car, you may not be paying attention to the road and traffic, but you will still perceive big things: like cars, especially when they are moving, even more so when they have a bright colour and in particular when that colour is blood-red.
4. "In both types of memory, conversion of short-term to long-term memory requires the activation of genes, and in each case modulatory transmitters appear to carry an attentional signal marking the importance of a stimulus. In response to that signal, genes are turned on and proteins are produced and sent to all the synapses. But these signals of salience are called up in fundamentally different ways for the implicit memory and for the explicit memory required to form the spatial map in the mouse. (p. 314)
In the implicit memory storage, the attentional signal is recruited involuntarily (reflexively), from the bottom up: the sensory neurons of the tail, activated by a shock, act directly on the cells that release serotonin. In spatial memory, dopamine [a neurotransmitter] appears to be recruited voluntarily, from the top down: the cerebral cortex activates the cells that release dopamine, and dopamine modulates activity in the hippocampus. (p. 314)"
So what happens if a space triggers a memory of an involuntary perceived shock?
Corrie
Of all the qualities I admire in you, I didn’t know yet (I should have guessed though) about your ability to relate difficult neurobiological information to clean questioning. I remember our first dialogue on the subject of clean space, when we discussed the bottum-up process of knowledge emerging from orienting in and moving around space. So I am very pleased with your article ‘The Neurobiology of Space’ in which you select quotes from Eric R. Kandel’s book In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind (2007) which relate to the neurobiology of space perception. I strongly believe that understanding the neurobiological basis of our perception and memory is the key to understanding psychological problems and repair, solve or heal them, in order to grow a healthy sense of self.
So allow me to make some comments on the matter; I would be very pleased if you (or anyyou else) chose to react to them.
1. “As soon as the metaphor of a map is used it brings with it entailments of a map reader. But, according to current neuroscience, there is no map reader in the brain, just synchronised electrical and chemical reactions from which behaviour emerges. Thus the map Kandel refers to is not a map in the ordinary sense of the word, it is a configuration of neurons whose pattern of firing contributes to the animal being able to navigate round its environment.”
Since there is no map reader and the map is made by experience, based on genetic wiring, wouldn’t it be better to refer to it as an self-organized ‘landscape’? Victor Lamme (see the thread on quantum mechanics) used for neuronal pathways the metaphor of a mountain path, shaped by (repeated) use.
2. “The spatial map discovered by O'Keefe differs radically from the egocentric sensory maps for touch and vision, because it is not dependent on any given sensory modality. O'Keefe found that as an animal walks around an enclosure, some place cells fire action potentials only when that animal moves into a particular location, while others fire when the animal moves to another place. The brain breaks down its surroundings into many small, overlapping areas, similar to a mosaic, each represented by activity in specific cells in the hippocampus. This internal map of space develops within minutes of the rat's entrance into a new environment. (pp. 308-309)
"An analogue in Clean Space is the breaking down of a complex abstract issue into several small areas, each represented by a verbal or nonverbal description of knowledge. What is new (to us, at least) is the notion of overlapping spaces.” ( © 2007, James Lawley)
What’s the difference between moving around in real space, which by a combination of different sensory inputs (light, distance to another object, sound, smell, etc) may trigger memories of similar spaces (or more at the same time in case of an overlap) and events that took ‘place’ at the time, and a mapping out by the conscious brain of a problem, described in terms of language or symbols? It seems to me that the former is helpful because by association it helps reconnect unconscious or disassociated memories (repair), while the latter is more useful in solving cognitive (neo-cortex) problems. Or the first needs to give input for the latter to make sense of it.
3. “In The Principles of Psychology [1890] William James pointed out that there is more than one form of attention. There are at least two types: involuntary and voluntary. Involuntary attention is supported by automatic neural processes, and is particularly evident in implicit memory. Involuntary attention is activated by a property of the external world of the stimulus and it is captured, according to James, by "big things, bright things, moving things, or blood.
Voluntary attention, on the other hand, such as paying attention to the road and traffic while driving, is a specific feature of explicit memory and arises from the internal need to process stimuli that are not automatically salient. (p. 313)
One of the key differences between [involuntary and voluntary attention] is not the absence or presence of salience, but whether the signal of salience is perceived consciously. Studies also suggest that, as James had argued, the determining factor in whether memory is implicit or explicit is the manner in which the attentional signal for salience is recruited. (pp. 313-314)”
So when you are driving a car, you may not be paying attention to the road and traffic, but you will still perceive big things: like cars, especially when they are moving, even more so when they have a bright colour and in particular when that colour is blood-red.
4. "In both types of memory, conversion of short-term to long-term memory requires the activation of genes, and in each case modulatory transmitters appear to carry an attentional signal marking the importance of a stimulus. In response to that signal, genes are turned on and proteins are produced and sent to all the synapses. But these signals of salience are called up in fundamentally different ways for the implicit memory and for the explicit memory required to form the spatial map in the mouse. (p. 314)
In the implicit memory storage, the attentional signal is recruited involuntarily (reflexively), from the bottom up: the sensory neurons of the tail, activated by a shock, act directly on the cells that release serotonin. In spatial memory, dopamine [a neurotransmitter] appears to be recruited voluntarily, from the top down: the cerebral cortex activates the cells that release dopamine, and dopamine modulates activity in the hippocampus. (p. 314)"
So what happens if a space triggers a memory of an involuntary perceived shock?
Corrie