Yin into Yang - potentials into actuals

[lightofdarkness]

From:
Brainstem origins for cortical ?what?and ?where? pathways in the auditory system
Nina Kraus and Trent Nicol

"Over the past 20 years, increasing attention has been paid to the functional organization of sensory systems. Across
modalities, sensory systems route different aspects of the input into discrete processing streams; in other words, a
particular stimulus, whether a seen object, a heard sound or a felt touch, is not processed in the brain as a unit.
Rather, different qualities of the stimulus (e.g. what it is, where it is coming from, and who or what is producing it)
are processed separately, yet simultaneously, by different neural mechanisms before the stimulus is consciously
perceived as a whole. Here, we present a novel way of looking at the origin of well-known what/where cortical
processing streams ? one that postulates a subcortical precursor to specialized speech processing in the cortex.

In 1983, a seminal article published in [TRENDS in Neurosciences] described two parallel processing streams in the visual system, the ventral and dorsal pathways [1]. These streams are responsible for object identification (e.g. color and shape)
and object location (e.g. position and motion), respectively, and have popularly become known as ?what? and ?where?
pathways. This separation, evident early in parvocellular and magnocellular ganglion cells in the retina [2], continues
throughout the afferent pathway via the thalamus to visual cortex. Evolutionarily, the dorsal ?where? pathway developed first [3]. It is also more responsive to multimodal stimulation than the ventral ?what? pathway [4,5]."

What the 2nd part indicates is ---- "yin", the undifferentiated/integrated came first and so validating the notion, when we focus on the natural binary sequence of the I Ching, that the realm of yin serves as a realm of POTENTIALS out of which come the ACTUALS in the form of YANG line patterns, the assertion of a 'thing' post the integration of elements to form a pattern that is the labelled.

Our reality, as a species, is YIN oriented, unconscious (stimulus/response, autopilot), reactive, social, driven by context to elicit instincts as responses. - note the "where" being sensitive to 'multimodal' aka 'multicontext' stimulation. The development of the 'what' is more single context in perspective. more 'precise' but can be too precise, so focused on the trees it misses the forest.

If we move from the dorsal/ventral dichotomy in each hemisphere to the right-brain/left-brain dichotomy the SAME pattern of development is shown - right brain is more developed at birth than left brain (in most). As differentiation of senses, an so general particularisation, takes over so the 'yang' side starts to dominate, to assert universals (such as handedness, discrete labels etc) - we move from general to particular.

Genetic diversity, hormones, or just local social context can the 'favour' a particular perspective to be favoured over all of the possible perspectives available on this dimension from yin to yang, integrating to differentiating etc etc.

If we move to the abstract realm of "Small World Networks", this development of YIN to YANG is dominating the universe as a whole in ITS development - IOW 'in here' reflects 'out there' rather well. With that development comes the ability to refuse to go on the ride any more - this allows for stratification to develop - but that development will STILL follow a yin-to-yang path, just localised in the particular, originating, context.

The IC binary sequence reflects this overall dynamic, rooted in the neuron (inputs (yin) to outputs (yang)) and all the way up into our collectives. As such, the micro and the macro is 'revealed' in the IC through the use of analogy/metaphor.

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

In 1983, a seminal article published in [TRENDS in Neurosciences] described two parallel processing streams in the visual system, the ventral and dorsal pathways [1]. These streams are responsible for object identification (e.g. color and shape) and object location (e.g. position and motion), respectively, and have popularly become known as ?what? and ?where? pathways.

Maybe very useful in robotics and life science.

In the metaphysics realm, the 'what' has to do with the search of the human identity and destiny. The 'where' is the location of where we are now, where we are from, and probably where we are heading to ...

 

[lightofdarkness]

In IDM, the process of identifying meaning maps to an ever increasing focus on identifying universals - and that includes self.

The more energy we put into this exercise, so the more we move from a 'diffuse' perspective to an ever increasing 'concentrated' perspective. As such, the realm of the approximate, the metaphoric, he vague, the semantic, moves from the 'field' to become focused on the 'dot' and in doing so semantics is transformed into one meaning - position in the hierarchy, where we are in relation to others.

IOW what we call semantics is concentrated to be labelled 'syntax'. This is reflected in social positioning where all that matters is one's position in the hierarchy, and so what/where becomes concentrated into a particular position that satisfies both what and where - we all seek to find our 'place'.

However, with consciousness comes a 'drive' in many to 'transcend' their position, to develop autonomy - be self-sufficient and so 'individual' with lots of skills etc - with that comes fragmentation but in that fragementation we can create our own hierarchy with ourselves at the 'top'! ;-)

I think it was Napoleon who commented that destiny has been transformed into a product of policy - and so reflecting the notion of creating one's own destiny.

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

I think it was Napoleon who commented that destiny has been transformed into a product of policy - and so reflecting the notion of creating one's own destiny.

That is about NOW and tomorrow.
One has the ability to chart his own course of life, for good or bad, starting from his own effort now, to create his own universe. So, attracting those of the same thinking and mindsets. When, a critical mass is reached, a universe is established! E.g. the Third Reich!

 

[yly2pg1]

If we move to the abstract realm of "Small World Networks", this development of YIN to YANG is dominating the universe as a whole in ITS development - IOW 'in here' reflects 'out there' rather well.

Is social norm a realm of "small world network"?

In this light, can we derive that I Ching is a blueprint of social engineering for the past thousands of year in the Middle Kingdom?

 

[lightofdarkness]

Social norms stem from differentiating/integrating dynamics and local 'connections' in an network can reflect those dynamics.

The IC in its universal form is a metaphor usable for social engineering. In its local form it has influenced local dynamics but with some 'novel' interpretations of events due to a lack of knowledge about the properties and methods of the universal.

The timing issues come into play in that you can speed up the inevitable or slow it down (and so get distracted and need to come back - 24)

See draft:

http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/Vague.pdf

or just refer to the references:

Marx, K., ([1859]) Dobb,M.(ed)(1970)"A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy" International Publishers
Fidlon David, (trans) - Various(1968)"Historical Materialism : Basic Problems" Progress Publishers, Moscow
Cohen, G.A. (1978)"Karl Marx's Theory of History" PUP
Elster, J., (1985)"Making Sense of Marx [part 2:theory of history]" CUP
Gladwell, M., (2000)"The Tipping Point" Little Brown
Buchanan, M., (2002)"Small World" Phoenix
Wolff, J.,(2002)"Why Read Marx Today?" OUP
Popper, K., (2002)"The Povery of Historicism" Routledge
Barabasi, A-L (2002)"Linked : The New Science of Networks" Perseus
Strogatz, S., (2003)"Sync" Allen Lane
Watts, J.D., (2003)"Six Degrees" Heinemann
Ball, P., (2004)"Critical Mass : How one thing leads to another"Heinemann

 

[yly2pg1]

This draws me into the question of non-self from the perspective of yin into yang...

 

[yly2pg1]

Generally, the Chinese is relatively 'forgetful' about their recent past events and history. It seems the process of yin into yang does not easily create a connection in a critical mass into a small world network?

 

[lightofdarkness]

There is a sense of history - worship of ancestors etc etc.

If there are too many connections, if all is connected to all else, so we have a totally integrated system - but no 'life' ;-) That is like working off instincts - it is the highs and lows that give us 'meaning' as such - and so YANG lines draw out a particular from the realm of potentials (pure yin).

The ground state for the species is pure yin with a 'touch' of yang. FROM that has emerged fragemention and so we move into fully expressing all of the potentials as actuals.

The sense of 'self' in the realm of yin is tightly integrated with the context - as shown in idiginous cultures such as Australian aborigines or American red indians - land and people are 'one'. This reflects a LACK in 'dot' precision, a focus on the qualitative over the quantitative.

As our consciousness has developed so we move from yin to yang - our identity becomes increasingly sources 'in here' and we, as individuals, become more 'universal'.

Being universal is fine in a universe we can operate in, but is not fine when it causes us to marginalise our own planet and so ignore its needs as an organic system.

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

The sense of 'self' in the realm of yin is tightly integrated with the context - as shown in idiginous cultures such as Australian aborigines or American red indians - land and people are 'one'. This reflects a LACK in 'dot' precision, a focus on the qualitative over the quantitative.

So the Great Wall of China is built (and repaired) because the emperor(s) is perceiving his subject and land as one against the Barbarian attack?

The repair and rebuilding of the Great Wall has stopped as recent as 18th century when an emperor starts to appreciate the Western science and technology.