Bernardo's active brain comments

[Lou Gold]

Lou,

The context of my comments has related to measurable brain activity by scientific means, such as EEG or fMRI. It is not related to whether your brain feels busy or feels calm, feels balanced or feels confused. The comments are in the context of this thread which is the context of scientific research on psychedelics.

C'mon Jim -- you are playing it both ways.

The larger point is that the relationships between brain activity and experience aren't simple and you can't tie transformative experience necessarily to decreased activity or increased activity in every case. And that includes the cases where the brain has a confusing mixture of increases and decreases as it does with psychedelics.

I addressed your statement and offered examples of the conditions under which the "confusing mixture of increases and decreases as it does with psychedelics" is practiced with the intention to integrate and transform. And, of course, as Shu already pointed out, increased awareness will have brain correlates such as quieting one area and activating another. And, in this sense, I intentionally chose Santo Daime rather than Zen examples because of all the vigorous activity, which undoubtedly produced increased brain correlates.

Lou,

I haven't seen that you have cited anything relating to scientific measurements or studies. You have only cited subjective feelings. There is certainly a place for subjective feelings but I am responding to this in the scientific context in which the questions have been asked. This all relates to the debates between Bernardo and various neuroscientists regarding reduction in the measurable brain activity under psychedelics. Do you have anything regarding Santo Daime in that regard?

We can't always go by feelings as far as knowing what the brain is actually doing. The calmness, one-pointedness of meditators is accompanied by increased brain activity but it is increased activity of a very specific type - mainly gamma waves in the example of the Zen practitioners.

Bernardo's argument has been that decreased brain activity with psychedelics seems to contradict the subjective experience of expanded awareness. But the understanding that the reduction of activity in the DMN puts the brain into a critical state with increased entropy and complexity of information explains the apparent contradiction. So there is really no confusion (perhaps I misspoke) or contradiction between the subjective experience and measurable brain activity.

Hmm, am I getting caught in yet another circle of back-and-forth? I have nothing scientific from Santo Daime to offer if science means empiricism with materialist measurements. OTOH, if science means observation of self and others in Santo Daime and among shamanic approaches with ayahuasca and peyote, I would say that there's a continuum. A person in deep healing showing much more activity and the healer in a calm clear space even though sometimes with an even higher dose. Thus, there is set/setting and practice or degree of prior integration. Perhaps, modern science does better focusing the question on meditators?

[findingblanks]

So his smile at the "decrease in brain activity" should be steadied by the fact that he believes we could and probably should very well eventually see an increase.

[Lou Gold]

So his smile at the "decrease in brain activity" should be steadied by the fact that he believes we could and probably should very well eventually see an increase.

I'm a bit lost in the thread, so I'm not sure who 'he' is but I'd say that the empirical results will continue to reflect the brain model, the intention of the investigator and even what words like 'increase' and 'decrease' mean. It's the kind of stuff that drives one toward Shu's notion of empty-fullness. Form is emptiness and emptiness is not other than form.

[findingblanks]

Yes, I can see that.

Many people can hear Bernardo talk about the 'decrease' of brain activity that correlates with complex and profound experience and forget that this 'decrease' refers to partial images of the experience itself. And, so, a different interaction tool with the alter could and should be expected to produce an image that correlates with the experience.

[findingblanks]

This might be helpful for me.

Do you think I am wrong in saying the following:

Bernardo's model would predict that with the right instrument we would expect to provoke some kind of material image of the human body that correlates to psychedelic experience? In other words, where we currently see no activity of the body, we would expect to see activity with the correct instrumental interaction.

[Lou Gold]

I'm a bit confused as to continuity in the thread and I think the question is above my paygrade. My intuition, however, suggests that an Idealist would say that a new mental model, a new way of being conscious, would come first and this would generate both a new instrument and a new way of imaging the psychedelic experience.

[findingblanks]

Thanks, Lou.

Yeah, I agree. And, therfore, that new instrument (scanner, prong, device) will find an increase is bodily activity associated with psychedelic experience. BK stresses the current decrease as if it suggests his model is correct.

But I'm saying that BK's own model predicts an increase in bodily activity if 'scanned' by correct instruments.

[Lou Gold]

Thanks, Lou.

Yeah, I agree. And, therfore, that new instrument (scanner, prong, device) will find an increase is bodily activity associated with psychedelic experience. BK stresses the current decrease as if it suggests his model is correct.

But I'm saying that BK's own model predicts an increase in bodily activity if 'scanned' by correct instruments.

No, not necessarily. You are processing a novel yet-to-be-known thinking back into the old way of thinking. What generally happens in a paradigm shift is that the old questions are replaced by new ones. In the new way with its new instruments there may be no sense in talking about brain activity.

[findingblanks]

But BK says that if the psychedelic experience is seen from across a dissociative membrain, it will appear as "physical" activity on the screen of perception.

[SanteriSatama]

But BK says that if the psychedelic experience is seen from across a dissociative membrain, it will appear as "physical" activity on the screen of perception.

"Dissociative membrain" is defined as Markov blanket in BK's theory. First problem with that is that Markov blanket is fully classical with only one directional time from "parents" to "bubble-insider experience" to "children".

So, by "physical activity" BK means here something that does not include mathematical cognition, as mathematical cognition is able to theorize (and experience!?) also multidirectional time such as palindromically reverse time of QM. I've tried to listen Friston explain his idea of "Me and my Markov blanket" couple times, but can manage only small doses to avoid temptation to throw socks and sandals at the screen. Today's attempt stopped when I saw Friston using only time independent Schrödinger equation.

All perception theories are inherently problematic, as the term in itself implies some kind of external reality (and hence subject-object dualism). Here the "perception screen" of Markov blanket is same old Plato's cave with new vocabulary.

BK defines "physical" as a sentient being. Trying to dissociate "physical" sentience and "aphysical" mathematical cognition leads to serious troubles for any general theory of idealism. But maybe such mathematical dissociation can function as a diagnosis of a certain kind of mental illness.