Conclusions


			Back		Home

UNDER CONSTRUCTION

We do not experience the world as it is. All we ever know is a mental model or matrix composed of cognitive elements - physical objects, people, beliefs, etc. - built by powerful unconscious processes. Thus, we do not know reality itself, rather we understand a theory or construct of that reality. This essay outlines some basic ideas about the brain processes that erect our reality-concept and the impact it has on our personality and behavior.

The two hemispheres of the human brain integrate and access information in distinct ways. The left hemisphere employs a technique I call analytical processing. It serves a conservative function in that it handles information that is strictly consistent with the preexisting world view. By contrast, the right hemisphere can access and modify large areas of the cognitive structure and provides the capacity to anticipate and adapt to change. This is summarized in the table below:

Hemisphere Specialization
	Left Hemisphere	Right Hemisphere
Processing	Analytical	Global
Matrix Access	Localized; builds upon the information that is already there.	Wide; simultaneous access to large areas of the cognitive structure.
View	Subjective; manipulates experience to fit mental structure.	Objective; can revise mental structure to match experience.
Provides	Capacity to conceptualize and understand the specific.	Adequate perception of the overall environment. Ability to anticipate and adapt to change.

The essay Hemisphere Specialization examines the role of the two halves of our brain.

The ability of the brain to generate a reliable perspective of reality is limited by its own functioning and sensitivity. When information comes in that is not consistent with the existing structure, and adaptation is not possible, the tendency is to engage psychological defense mechanisms. These deny or distort the threatening stimuli to fit the current framework.
As an example of psychological defenses, consider anosognosia, a remarkable condition in which patients who are clearly paralyzed deny their paralysis. The fact that it is most common in people who have suffered a stroke in the right hemisphere and not the left suggests that it has to do with the left hemisphere's limited capacity to adapt - in this case update the body schema. Anosognosia is a striking example of the same defenses we all engage whenever our world view is threatened with contradictory evidence.
Another condition that triggers denial is neglect, in which a patient is profundly indifferent to one side of the world, usually the left. A neglect patient may ignore people who approach from the left, leave food untouched on the left side of the plate, or even forget to put clothes on the left side of her body. If the symptoms extent to visual tasks, and the patient is asked to draw a picture, for example, everything on the left side of the drawing is ignored.

Neglect can be explained when we look at how both hemispheres guide our movements towards stimulus, sometimes known as orienting: The right hemisphere, with its holistic approach to perception is able to turn attention to the right and left visual fields. The left hemisphere's orienting processes, by contrast, deal exclusively with the right visual field - perhaps this further aids visuo-motor control of the right hand. When the right hemisphere is damaged, the left hemisphere is unable to compensate, and left-orienting facility is lost.

In an interesting experiment performed by Dr. VS Ramachandran and his colleagues, a mirror is positioned so that an object held on the patients' neglected side is reflected on the right. When asked to grasp the object, the patients reached towards the reflection, as if the object were inside the mirror or behind it. They rationalized their reaction as follows:

"The darn mirror is in the way."

"The pen is inside the mirror and I can't reach it!"

"The real object is out there, behind the mirror, doctor."

(Phantoms in the Brain, William Morrow, 1998, p. 125)

Anosognosia and neglect remind us that our belief system - however elaborate or sublime - exists for the sole purpose of keeping us alive and reproducing, and as such is vulnerable or even subservient to our instincts and other basic functions of the brain.

Interesting research on neglect : Insights From Parietal Neglect and Extinction.
Our construct of the world and personality are closely related. This is explored in The Fundamental Nature of the Jungian Functions. The essay looks at the brain processes that may underlie the functions, and helps provide insight into human idiosyncrasies that Jungian typology and its derivatives do not adequately address. The reader will have to let go of some MBTI concepts, particularly the notion that Extraversion is directed towards the outer world, and Introversion towards the inner, psychological world. Furthermore, Sensing and Intuition are defined as processing the static and dynamic aspects of experience.

Note to reader: The descriptions for Introversion and Extraversion, given towards the beginning of the essay, apply only to the perceiving function. The function Te, of an ESTJ, for example, is not an 'expansive force that is stimulated by the world at large.' Rather, it is a process that brings order upon the impressions provided by the auxiliary, in this case Si. Thus, the Introversion model is more apt. Similarly, for an ISTP, one would refer to the description given for Extraversion, as the perceiving function is Extraverted.

In the essay, I mention the words homogeneous and cyclical. I would like to stress how important these are to SPs and SJs respectively.

The datapoint/connection ratio determines function order. For instance, the ISTP has more connections per datapoint than the ESTP, because the ISTP judging function is more developed.

I say that Intuition allows us to apply our acquired knowledge in an unfamiliar situation (Ne) and understand something that we have never before encountered (Ni). This is because the Intuitive matrix, constructed with process, is much easier to superimpose on unknowns than the Sensing matrix, which relies on physical structure.

The perceiving function is the function that most defines the individual. The table below shows what I see as the biggest differences between Sensors and Intuitives.

The conflicting nature of the two perceiving functions.
Se	Ni
Values personal stability.	Values personal growth and change.
Values homogeneity.	Values personal freedom and individuality.
Values the experience itself.	Values the abstract principles underlying the experience.

Si	Ne
Values social stability and order.	Values social progress and change.
Values authority and centralized control.	Values a decentralized system with no central authority figure.
Values the subjective interpretation of experience.	Values the possibilities suggested by experience.

The values and needs are not just in conflict, but actually represent what the opposing type fears most.

A similar site to mine, though not as speculative: Schema Theory and Myers Briggs.

Intuition is undervalued in our society, perhaps because it is a minority function or because Western culture is primarily materialistic. Yet, its capacity to process change, makes this perspective less fragmented. Intuitives often have a strong value system based on growth and a desire to overcome obstacles. This is lacking in the Sensor, who places more value on epistemological, social and material stability than on personal or social progress. In a truer context, though, all actions are ultimately selfish in nature.
A key feature of the cognitive matrix theory is the idea that mental structure is just a limited representation of reality. This gives rise to the behavioral concept I call active defenses - destructive behavior patterns that maintain an environment that is easy and safe to process.

An appeal to our destructive side: Active defenses can serve to establish homogeneity.

TV Commercial
Active defenses become a primary motivational force at puberty, having remained dormant or at least limited in expression during childhood. From then on, we engage them continually to ensure that our world can be safely processed through our mental structure. An extreme example of active defenses is rape. Experts agree that aside from its sexual character, rape is often an attempt to objectify the victim, i.e. reduce her to her physical aspect alone. The same psychological mechanism is expressed in many forms, not just physical aggression, and is found in practically every human interaction.

Generally, through active defenses we scan our environment, and through desruction, or by imposing an order or morality, we ensure that it is and will remain safe to process. An interesing human quirk, however, is to establish a controlled situation of precisely the kind we fear most. We offer the forbidden fruit, so to speak. And when the person takes it, we show them the error of their ways.

Recommended Books (my webspace)

Consciousness and personality from many perspectives (my webspace)

	Home		Shroud of Turin		India Travelogue		Nepal		Gibraltar