Poetic Dissection

"Our analysis also identifies a subset of brain regions in which the activity in the listener’s brain precedes the activity in the speaker’s brain. The listener’s anticipatory responses were localized to areas known to be involved in predictions and value representation (20–23), including the striatum and medial and dorsolateral prefrontal regions (mPFC, dlPFC). The anticipatory responses may provide the listeners with more time to process an input and can compensate for problems with noisy or ambiguous input (24). This hypothesis is supported by the !nding that comprehension is facilitated by highly predictable upcoming words (25). Remarkably, the extent of the listener’s anticipatory brain responses was highly correlated with the level of understanding (Fig. 4B), indicating that successful communication requires the active engagement of the listener (26, 27)." Stephens and Hasson On First Looking into Chapman’s Homer By John Keats Much have I travell’d in the realms of gold,

And many goodly states and kingdoms seen;

Round many western islands have I been

Which bards in fealty to Apollo hold.

Oft of one wide expanse had I been told

That deep-brow’d Homer ruled as his demesne;

Yet did I never breathe its pure serene

Till I heard Chapman speak out loud and bold:

Then felt I like some watcher of the skies

When a new planet swims into his ken;

Or like stout Cortez when with eagle eyes

He star’d at the Pacific—and all his men

Look’d at each other with a wild surmise—

Silent, upon a peak in Darien. Handy Guide By Dean Young Avoid adjectives of scale. Dandelion broth instead of duck soup. Don’t even think you’ve seen a meadow, ever. The minor adjustments in our equations still indicate the universe is insane, when it laughs a silk dress comes out its mouth but we never put it on. Put it on. Cry often and while asleep. If it’s raw, forge it in fire. That’s not a mountain, that’s crumble. If it’s fire, swallow. The heart of a scarecrow isn’t geometrical. That’s not a diamond, it’s salt. That’s not the sky but it’s not your fault. My dragon may be your neurotoxin. Your electrocardiogram may be my fortune cookie. Once an angel has made an annunciation, it’s impossible to tell him he has the wrong address. Moonlight has its own befuddlements. The rest of us can wear the wolf mask if we want or look like reflections wandered off. Eventually armor, eventually sunk. You wanted love and expected what? A parachute? Morphine? A gold sticker star? The moment you were born— you have to trust others because you weren’t there. Ditto death. The strongest gift I was ever given was made of twigs. It didn’t matter which way it broke.             Both poems are similar in that they tell about a comment on a very real happening. The first on the translation of Homer and the other begins with a caution of some sense. However, the latter goes on to an unpredictable pattern. This is where the Stephens article becomes key. This article was a study on oral speaker-listener connection and its cognitive effects. This is interrelated to the Theory of Mind talked about in an earlier class The small excerpt brings up a very interesting point and one that relates well to these poems.            When one treats these narrators as though they are a speakers, which is indeed the case due to our theory of mind, they might in fact exhibit these same qualities. The above excerpt tells how the listeners mind in fact activates before the speakers in order to find a pattern in speech and thus in the conversation's content and timing. This can be clearly seen in Keats poem. While his colorful language is a little unpredictable, the majority of the poem is easily predictable and can be followed with ease. However, the Young poem is a contradiction to this process. It uses unpredictable sentences that lack a cohesive superficial meaning such as: "My dragon may be your neurotoxin." or "Your electrocardiogram may be my fortune cookie." Because of this unpredictability, the poem baffles the "listener" and their progression to a pattern-filled conversation. However, this makes poetry more true to its purpose of imagination and interpretation. Through this lack of pattern, one must come to conclusions through self-interpretation and possible education on topics unknown. How a dragon could be a neurotoxin is not a normal statement, but a dragon could stand for many things (like strength, mysticism, fire, evil, etc.) that could possibly correlate with neurotoxin. This allowance for variability allows for a freedom of the mind for the mind. In other words, it allows for the listener to disengage predictability and thus nonchalant care towards the poem in order to allow the full imagination and interpretation that lets the poem speak differently to each member of its audience.

Baby Don't Hurt Me, Don't Hurt Me No More.

"Emotions play out in the theater of the body. Feelings play out in the theater of the mind. As we shall see, emotions and the host of related reaction that underlie them are part of the basic mechanisms of life regulation; feelings also contribute to life regulation, but at a higher level. Emotions and related reactions seem to precede feelings in the history of life. Emotions and related phenommena are the foundation for feelings, the mental events that form the bedrock of our minds and whose nature we wish to elucidate." Antonio Damasio in Of Appetites and Emotions

"On the other side of a mirror there’s an inverse world, where the insane go sane; where bones climb out of the earth and recede to the first slime of love.

     And in the evening the sun is just rising.

      Lovers cry because they are a day younger, and soon childhood robs them of their pleasure.

      In such a world there is much sadness which, of course, is joy . . .   " Antimatter by Russell Edson

       This little snippet of a fascinating article, by Demasio, sums the entire paper. It tells of the bio-psychological occurrences that are associated with humans at various levels of cognition, both conscious and not. He says that there should be a distinction between "Emotions" and "Feelings." While this is fine, he makes a distinction that is not normal to conventional thinking. This thought that the outward emotions are the cause of feeling rather than the result is different yet ingenious. In this view, feelings are a reflective process that allows one to reason actions/emotions and influence personality and future actions. With this view, the above poem becomes a story that makes sense in more than just a metaphorical way. The poem on first glance is about opposites becoming the natural order of a parallel world. But after reading the article the last few lines really stand out. "Lovers cry because they are a day younger, and soon childhood robs them of their pleasure. In such a world there is much sadness which, of course, is joy . . ." This line becomes much more interesting with the edition of emotions preceding feelings. Their feelings of joy and sadness are different because their world is different and because emotions exhibited are different. Lovers cry because this emotion of sorrow is then reflected on the loss of time of maturity. All in all this mirror world is one that is wholly not unlike our own, but the details seem askew.

        However my one concern with this article is the lack of definition of the cause of emotions. It is mentioned that emotion is biological and that we do not need to learn how to exhibit them but why we exibit them changes. I questions this drive to show emotion and why it is undefined. This drive to exhibit an emotion is not classified by the Spinoza Appetites or Desires. I would just like to know the classifications of this state otherwise known as the emotional development. For example, anger is sometimes grown from annoyance but this is then developed from an unknown "feeling" or another appropriate word.

Imaginative Entities

"The close relation between navigating social- and story-worlds has a number of
implications, not the least interesting of which is the proposal that readers of predominantly
narrative fiction may actually improve or maintain their social-inference
abilities through reading. The same is unlikely to be true of non-fiction readers.
Although in both cases individuals are removing themselves from true social interaction
by virtue of the solitary nature of reading, non-fiction presumably does not
sponsor the same simulation of the social world as narrative fiction. Frequent readers
of non-fiction, then, by sacrificing human interaction and replacing it with no similar
substitute, may actually impair their social skills. Individual differences in reading
habits and preferences, then, may relate systematically to individual differences in
social-processing ability." By Raymond A. Mar et al. "Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to Fiction
versus non-fiction, divergent associations with social ability, and the simulation of fictional social worlds"

         This study opens with a discussion of social stereotypes that comment on the charisma of those who predominantly read more than other activities. It brings up the hypothesis that, while those who read non-fiction may be inept in social situations, those who read fiction are actually better in social situations and are stronger in things dealing with the "Theory of the mind." It tells the process and subjects used in the study (which included a wide age range and many types of tests). The article takes into account some uncontrollable variable (like age leading to wisdom or knowing English for longer period of time) by halving results multiple times to ensure trends. This resulted in a slight but significant correlation between fiction and social ability.
           While these were taken into account, the main fact was that the narratives found in fiction novels are the main result. However, the question I have is, "Can this be taken further?" My question is fueled by curiosity but more importantly in pursuit of education. Perhaps a study comparing those who read fiction very little if at all and those who read fiction a lot. One point I would like to raise is reminiscent of my talk about the education of language. If one can learn to pronounce words and talking in ones mind and experience language without a personal attachment (through a computer for example) then can one learn social actions and personality from fiction alone? Of course one would have to read the books of the culture of the time because of the ever changing social aspects of different cultures. If this could be overcome, then can one learn how to socialize in a manner that seems very unorthodox, but perhaps has an educational and social validity.
         One other idea that could be interesting is to try and teach other primates about human society. Primates have the ability to learn sign language and memorize with great speed and accuracy. If there was a way to have these animals "read" fiction novels with great narration, could they be able to function in society. Charles Darwin commented on humans and other animals saying, "their differences are in degree not kind." Other ethologists have said that animals show emotions and other human actions to a lesser degree, and by accomplishing a feat such as this perhaps we could see that the development of complex society is not unique and rather can be learned. The foundation for such social intricacy then can be implied as being biological. This would have to be taken cautiously because this could be twisted into a dark place (i.e. sociobiology and eugenics). However, it could lead to a revolution in not only animal biology but in cognition as well. It could help us perhaps trace the lineage of different thinking processes among species and more.

Getting down to Business

Bare with me that I haven't had much time to look at this (just got the critiques on wed.) but I have gotten some great tips and creative direction from our Professor.

Circles, Brains, and Squares Oh My! - Margaret Cavendish           

           The 18^th century was a time of much discussion and contention involving the brain and its inner-workings. However, there was a backlash from other scientists for a movement against defining the brain and the mind. Those in literature as well as science contested this definition of a unified brain including one young prolific author, Margaret Cavendish. Cavendish argued against the merging of the mind and brain, especially the fact of placing the mind in the organ known as the brain. Cavendish outright humiliated those who tried to demystify it. Through her poem, “The Circle of the Brain cannot be Squared,” Cavendish sets a message that confronts the defining of the mind in the confines of the brain, but also sends a silent outcry against the mathematical simplicity implied about and the worn methodology used to analyze the mind-brain complex.

Possible Sentence beginnings to paragraphs:

1st: The circle was a symbol that had a deep significance to philosophers, scientists, and mathematicians alike. 

2nd:While Cavendish used the imagery of geometry to explain the complexity of the mind, she also critiqued the tendency of those who studied the brain to confine both the brain and mind to a simplistic idea.

3rd: The final major point that Cavendish makes is that those studying the brain have been trying relentlessly for a long time without much result.

Conclusion:

           Cavendish was an extravagant writer that had a passion for her fancies. She wasn't respected in her time but she still expressed her thoughts because the valued both the mind and the brain. She argued against those minds at her time because she just could not stand idly and watch the brain with all its complexities and fullness be transformed into a simple formula or graph. She believed in the ability of natural perception and reasoning and by having this outrageous idea that it, the brain, can be boiled down to the simplicity of the same magnitude as a square. Cavendish and her opinion are very valuable to scientific and educational philosophy and through studying her words one can appreciate the complexity of the brain and of human thought.

Sweet Dreams are made of These: The Flower

Visible also in Pegasus, therefore, is the imagination's aspiration to lift us above the material world, to disencumber us of given restraints. The flower, no doubt, makes visible the opposite movement of imagination, its willful re-encumbering of itself, its anchoring of itself in the ground- its aspiration, in other words, to rival material reality in its vivacity. ~ Elaine Scarry in Dreaming by the Book

10. The absence of the stimuli of external bodies, and of volition, in our dreams renders the organs of sense liable to be more strongly affected by the powers of sensation, and of association. For our desires or aversions, or the obtrusions of surrounding bodies, dissever the sensitive and associate tribes of ideas in our waking hours by introducing those of irritation and volition amongst them. Hence proceeds the superior distinctness of pleasurable or painful imagery in our sleep; for we recall the figure and the features of a long lost friend, whom we loved, in our dreams with much more accuracy and vivacity than in our waking thoughts. This circumstance contributes to prove, that our ideas of imagination are reiterations of those motions of our organs of sense, which were excited by external objects; because while we are exposed to the stimuli of present objects, our ideas of absent objects cannot be so distinctly formed. ~ Erasmus Darwin in Zoonomia

          In the article written by Scarry, we learn about the importance of the flower in the imagery of dreams. It tells of how the abstract in dreams are collections of prior conceived objects that are not directly symbolic of anything. Rather, these objects are place markers for ideas that are inconceivable. The flower is different. It is a grounding in the real world that is able to hold the greatest attention and beauty. It is through the flower that the dreamer tries to bring reality to the abstract. It tells about the flower is so perfect for memory and the vision captured. Darwin tells of the physiological implications of dreaming and sleep. In the last sentence of the extract above, "This circumstance contributes to prove, that our ideas of imagination are reiterations of those motions of our organs of sense, which were excited by external objects; because while we are exposed to the stimuli of present objects, our ideas of absent objects cannot be so distinctly formed." This fits exactly with what Scarry talks about. Darwin tells about how imagination is more stable and believable when it is grounded in reality. This is because it is more powerful and takes more concentration and will to reproduce something so complex and little as a flower in one's mind.

           This brings to mind a question that has been given some popular thought. The idea of lucid dreaming and losing oneself in such a dream. Most recently the movie inception tried to struggle with this question. But it is very important to think about. Since we discuss how the mind works and its studies, why not investigate its ability to replicate the real world. Many questions then come to mind. How does our brain recreate the real? How does one believe these recreations, even if the belief is temporary? These seem the most important because it deals with something that is exclusively internal. Something that can only be experienced from the mind of the dreamer. While everyone dreams, everyone has different dreams that have some subconscious commentary on there life. It is a question not only for philosophy but of science as well. If the mind is able to trick and be tricked at the same time, what mechanisms are activated and can they be manipulated? Can the flower with its infinite beauty and unending complexity be pinpointed by the neuroscientist? These readings in my own opinion don't give answers but raise many more, a quizzical hydra of sorts. All we know is that the vivid ability to recreate reality captures our attention. It can be seen in movies, literature, digital media, and any other sort of entertainment. This ability to set oneself in the moment, to recreate a time that did exist and to imprint it onto an endless space is nothing short of marvelous in the truest sense of the word. So this ability to dream a dream, to re-experience an experience, is something that is so vast and complex that even the most delicate things of life, like the gorgeous bowl of roses, or the delphinium; must be taken in separately and studied. Only after one can master the knowledge of the flower, can they take the next step towards decoding the mirage that is the dream.

Free Week: Ramblings of a Philosopher Prince

Sitting here, having just slid the physical copy of the literary, intellectual shitstorm that was my paper, I slowly eat my cocoa pebbles wondering about the world around me and feeling compelled to write a blog for this week. Seeing as my ability and wanting to write prose is equal to how much I want Mike Tyson to play slug-bug with me, (I'll give you a hint; it starts with "No way" and ends with "in hell") I think I will stick to a medium of high art and fashion, other wise known to some of my friends as, "that thing that weird emo-kids do." Of course what I am talking about is poetry, or what I deem as poetry. This of course would be a misconception on my part because it falls somewhere between "Roses are red..." poems and nursery rhymes. Now that the caffeine is settling in, so should you too, my audience, and prepare for the strange thinkings of a kook, a screwball, and a gentleman of a certain degree, bachelors for those who are wondering.
If you're still reading, or just skipped to this line for no apparent reason, kudos because now you get to hear from a brain that the Mad Hatter himself would label as brother:

My story begins, where all things must,
the middle of the beginning or maybe just
the beginning of a series called my life,
or maybe, the pages of the past, are cut down with a knife.

I agree with you that all of this seems really, very strange.
You read this with your thoughts, this bullocks very plain
The mind leads to think, memories to fade or to change
to live, to dream, to fight, to love, to be insane

A life as a hopeful Romantic is a hopeless one abound,
Like one searching for treasure; no map or starting ground.
And when he finds the husk, of a plunder that's been done,
he is not careless or thinks there's only one.

This pilgrim of the detail, learns life through another
each failure, a new truth, each scratch, mental loot;
closer, final chest, new tricks for the lover
of wit and of beauty he doth pursuit

For one learns Happiness, be not a single road
with a message golden that a sign does well bode.
Pursuit isn't one lone beast but one of many heads
and life is but a journey, living fear and dreads
find there way into minds dreaming in their beds.

In conclusion, my mind doth spin -- like a top,
sitting in my chair, silent sleeper ego lies
falling from my head drip by drop
cutting all subconscious ties
Says the id about to flop
mindless, mad demise.

Sound of Silence

"Mental conversion into sound plays an essential role when we read a word for the first time... Initially, we cannot possibly access its meaning directly, since we have never seen the word spelled out. all we can do is convert it into sound, find that the sound pattern in intelligible, and, through this indirect route, come to understand the new word. Thus sounding is often the only solution when we encounter a new word." ~ Reading in the Brain by Stanislas Dehaene pg 27

" Those only who have attempted to teach children can conceive how extremely difficult it is to fix their attention, or to make them seize the connection of ideas, which it appears to us almost impossible to miss. Children are well occupied in examining external objects, but they must also attend to words as well as things. One of the great difficulties in early instruction arises from the want of words: the pupil very often has acquired the necessary ideas, but they are not associated in his mind with the words which his tutor uses; these words are then to him mere sounds, which suggest no correspondent thoughts." ~Of Tasks by Maria Edgeworth pg. 14

         In the small selection of Reading in the Brain that was assigned, Dehaene tells of a multitude of strange ways the brain does when reading. The first being the peculiarity of the brains attention to small details but is lacking in larger differences. For example the word eight and sight are nearly identical except for the first letter yet the brain can notice this small different and assign vastly different meanings to said words. However, when One ChaNges the caSe of worDs then the brain filters out said case when interpreting the words meaning and sound. This also happens with words in italics or in bOLd. Another area covered is the automatic breakdown of words into smaller parts in order to classify their meanings otherwise known as morphemes. But one of the largest parts of the selection discusses speech inside the mind. When reading silently words are "spoken" in one's mind and through this we learn and correlate letters, groups of letters that make an understandable sound (bigrams) and finally an audibly correct sounding word. Through other memories and classifications made through learning from others, visual relations, or other means. This learning through sound is the primary learning of children according Dehaene because of the necessary need to slowly comprehend a string of letters and association with a prior known word. 
           Edgeworth however implies something different. Instead of the innate ability to associate morphemes through vision-based teaching, Edgeworth believed that children could not make the connection because they lacked the attention. This fits with her prior thoughts on attention and its very limited amount that can be used at one time. Edgeworth believes that the only way to be able to use and have a large vocabulary is to have many friends and be social. Thus there is a stress on vocalization in order to gain understanding of words. This is also stressed by the understanding of sounds and not the letters themselves. Therefore by learning the sounds found on page 6, one can begin to string together words in order to practice in front of others and learn from everyone. 
             The question at hand however is about learning words and recognizing them. Can one build a large vocabulary through not talking in this day and age of digital, impersonal globalization? If Edgeworth were to look and experience the internet there would be a rather different story. The internet is filled with millions of bits of information of audio, visual and written kinds. We see that as new generations are made, the more connected to technology they become. Because of this, would it be a terrible hindrance to learning if children learn by listening instead of conversing? Would priming still work correctly if words are only spoken through silent thinking? The internet seems like a save-all but will it be the handicap to generations of techno-kids? I believe Dehaene thinks not and it is through this silent talking and priming that words are primarily understood. As long as basic words can be learned in order to create associated morphemes then it seems that a basic understanding of written language can be learned. As for spoken syntax and other vocal peculiarities, these too could be learned without direct communication and could theoretically be taught through mimicry. Imagine, a world where one only learns from a computer screen and cannot live without it... I'm lookin' at you Google and Wikipedia.