 |
| What are God and Heaven doing up in the clouds? |
neuropolitics | Space.
The final frontier. And when it comes to religiosity, it just might be.
Out of the clouds, Fred Previc has constructed an ingenious theory of
religiosity based on the multiple mechanisms employed by the brain to
map and direct its behaviors in 3-dimensional space. As we shall see,
Previc's theory of religiosity has many similarities with Brack's hemisphericity
theory of political orientation, both of which propose a key role to the
dopaminergic system in the modulation of religiosity (and in our case,
political conservatism).
Although
our theories were derived independently, Previc's original manuscript, The role of extrapersonal brain systems in religious activity, predates
the introduction of our theory (via the web) by several months. Although
it does not specifically address political disposition, it is such a theory
by proxy, via the strong relationship between religiosity and political
conservatism. While Previc's theory makes full use of the large volume of
literature implicating the dopamine system in religious behavior, it is
a quantum leap in the theory of religiosity, and centered upon the various
mechanisms on how the brain behaves in the four 3-dimensional spatial realms
it has constructed for itself, and how time itself has become enmeshed with
the brain's rendering of space.
Fred
Previc knows something about space. Previc was the lead of the United States
Air Force's Spatial Disorientation Countermeasures Task Group, which studied
pilot spatial disorientation in flight, a major cause of aeronautic accidents.
How he has subsequently woven his research and theories on the brain's rendering
of space into a theory of religiosity is one the great insights in the history
of neuropsychology. But what exactly is Previc's theory?
4 comments:
What, pray tell, might these conclusions be Ken? Negritos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito are the primary Denisovan survival - at one time dispersed all over the world, including throughout the new world, as there are quite a "native" American stories about the forerunner 'little black men". The punch line, for anybody paying attention, is that the "little black men" are Negritos are the most genetically distant human population from Africans at most loci studied thus far (except for MC1R, which codes for dark skin) - leaving us completely in the dark concerning the fundamental mystery of what made you all so pale, 4-dimensionally challenged, and devilish. (^;
NSangoma could doubtless fill you in on ALL the juicy archeological and civilizational details were he so inclined. Bro. Runoko Rashidi is perhaps the greatest living expositor of the legacy of van Sertima, Diop, Clarke, et al http://www.cbpm.org/gap.html and is a good starting point for anyone disposed to get a handle on this dimension of history's mysteries.
I am not of the belief that we got here by A being able to mate with B and B with C but not C with A, there just wasn't enough of that to manage through all the variations the narrative has to assume it took, to finally be where we are with the species today. With that, though I am in tune to new information and how it will affect the theoretical narrative and how others will make conclusions from the new information.
Being able to DNA test bones is going to challenge the narrative, sure enough, but what I was really looking at in the context here is that we'll first develop a nature of a certain species of ancient pre-human, and then we'll determine how the variations of humans today are affected behaviorally, or intellectually, or any other category by what lineage they came out of according to the narrative.
lol, there's no question whatsoever how BD and those of his ventral cortical axial disposition will run with this....,
Or in this case temporal-occipital and orbitofrontal cortex since they see things that just.aren't.there.
Post a Comment