D= iagnosis, Cognitive Loops, and Paradoxes:

M= aking Sense about Coming to Know

Dr. Fritz Mengert=

Phenomenological Epistemologist

Neur= oCognitive Application Protocols

&= copy; September 2001

<= o:p>

<= !--[if gte vml 1]>

Drawing Hands, by M. C. Escher (1948)

A modest study of the diagnosis of the problems of learning

To begin to look at the problems of learning from a neurocognitive perspective= we first have to visit some strange places and think some strange thoughts. We will start with the figure to t= he right called a paradoxicon. M= any of you have seen this sort of art and associate it with the work of M. C. Escher. Escher drew hundreds = of “paradoxical” figures and has been imitated but never equaled in his craft.

= ;

So now, to think about functional neurological problems of acquisition you will have to shift your brain away from the linear thinking that serves you so well in y= our daily lives. It will be easie= r for some of you than others; but rest assured, it is worth the trip! You see diagnosis is not only a scientific problem; it is an aesthetic problem as well. Let us begin by having you think in three genres.

=3D"*" P= aradoxes in language

=3D"*" P= aradoxes in sound

=3D"*" P= aradoxes in sight (which we have already begun)

= ;

First you = need some background in science to keep you company during this journey. Let us set some parameters, as scientists are wont to do. Th= e ones we want to set here are all about consciousness. You will need to learn three things about human consciousness immediately.&nbs= p; I am somewhat in debt to Donald Keyes for these three but they are n= ot his. He only made me think ab= out them.

= ;

First, consciousness is the produ= ct of the brain and therefore the quality and configuration of the brain m= ore than suggests the quality and configuration of individual consciousness. This one is easy, isn’t it?<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> It is not difficult to consider the notion that consciousness comes from somewhere. It just makes good sense to attrib= ute its genesis to the brain. It is e= ven more commonsensical to assume that the producer is directly related to the product. Some neuro-thinkers = for whom I have respect see consciousness as quite mysterious even suggesting t= hat it might have extra physical connections.&= nbsp; Consciousness is mysterious, but it not a resident of woo-woo land. Of course, other locations could b= e a starting place for consciousness. The liver, for example, has been a favorite organ historically. It once was implicated in many dis= cussions about neuroscience and consciousness but modern neuroscience has nearly convinced all thinking peop= le that it is probably best to believe that the brain is the progenitor of hum= an consciousness.

= ;

Second, consciousness is a very pe= rsonal place where we live our lives with only the outer ridges of our consciousness touching the consciousness of others. Our being able to think for/with ourselves protects the privacy of our thought. Being the producer, director, and audience for what we ultimately think precludes most unwanted intruders. Yes, some Freudians might violently disagree with this view as well as some Marxists; but for now we will withh= old comment on these disagreements to return to it later. It is also true that we may be mis= sing some subset studies that would displease psychologically disposed neuroscientists as well. Of c= ourse, there is such a thing as “non-verbal” communication and there m= ay be important issues of extra-sensory perception or even telekinesis which h= ave yet to be fully studied. The implications of those studies have not found a scientific home, but they ca= nnot be easily dismissed from a discussion of consciousness. <= /p>

= ;

Third, consciousness is in some w= ays an assemblage of electrical sensory impulses that stimulate thalamic region ce= ll clusters establishing connections to the cerebral cortex. These appear to occur in levels fo= ur and six and, in effect, form a transmission “loop” that seems to eventuate the possibility of interpretive-sensory thought. Do not get concerned here about wh= at you do not know but do take careful note of the words interpretive, image, and the concept of loop. This is Erich Harth’s (among others, but I like Erich’s work best) insight and it has not been rejected after a decade of reasonably careful collegial review. =

= ;

For educat= ors there is a complicated but important concept critical to thinking in neuro-epistemological terms. = This is the concept of neuro-interpretation.&nb= sp; The brain has a propensity for stasis. That is, it seeks knowing the= way it knows easiest and is operationally committed to patterns that are in pla= ce rather than developing new or organizing different patterns. The activity of change is quite difficult for brains and becomes more so with maturation. Habituated behavior is difficult to change even when deemed unacceptable. In order to stimulate change, to learn more of a different quality t= han is presently known, the interpretive act itself must be changed.=

= ;

This eleva= ted interpretive process is called epi= phenomenalization and means “going beyond the phenomena” of interpretation and co= ming to another way to know. Somet= imes learners must be exposed to another way to know (interpret) than the one th= ey have “naturally” employed.&nbs= p; If an alternate process is not taught (or at least suggested) then a= ny “off pattern” learning may be short-termed and meaningless. The study of epiphenomenal qualia = is best engaged after the concepts of this paper are examined.

= ;

Another important principle for our study holds that language precedes thought. This principle must be connected to educating at all levels, yet it is a difficult one to articulate because th= ere is plenty of literature suggesting that humans do indeed “language= 221; their experience. The position adopted here is distilled from a linguist of the 1950s named Benjamin Whorf. Whorf was adamant that language and thought were distinct brain acts and that the language compone= nt had to take place so that there could be thought. From my own study, I accept that position and have premised some epistemological conclusions on it.   Again, it should be emphasiz= ed that language acquis= ition and language manipulation is the platform for knowing. The brain converts experience to language through the sophisticated use of analogies and metaphors to form descriptions at the highest levels of brain activity.

From these beginning points, we will dive into neuro enigmas and paradoxes. First, an Eric Harth story (1996) = about a London pub known for its excellent stout (the story illustrates metaphorically the direction where we are going). Harth calls this a “positive feedback” model and it appl= ies to loops and paradoxes.

= ;

The pub’s reputation = was the result of the concatenation of chance events and the mechanism of posit= ive feedback that is often the cause of instability and novelty. The stout is always fresh because = the pub is always crowded.   = The pub is always crowded because the stout is always fresh. Resulting also from the bootstrap process, which started with an all but untraceable fluctuation, was the sud= den, unexpected prosperity of the owner.

            =

Consciousn= ess has not been explained to the satisfaction of the present crop of neuroscientists. Nevertheless= there are some “for sures” that will have to serve as the foundation = for the diagnoses of learning problems from an educator’s perspective. It is certain that we are consciou= s of our surroundings, can meter tense and time, and are generally involved in objective, comparative identification.&nbs= p; Human beings have some sort of capacity for anticipating and recogni= zing physical and emotional danger, knowing when they are sick, and have some concept of mortality that is heightened as we age. Most of us prefer pleasure to pain= , are able to fit cultural expectations, and desire to please our family and friends. We are able to recog= nize and moderate the urgency to reproduce and can deal with the attendant birth= and rearing of offspring.

= ;

These thin= gs are not isolated neural behaviors, but are part of a complex consciousness = that we share with many if not most of the people we live with or near. In addition, we seem to be creatur= es of habit (habituation is a neural act) and appear to live in loops of repetiti= ve behavior always reverting toward---if not to---the norm. This issue is important for an edu= cational diagnostician to consider. Reversion to habituated behavior is a problem that must be examined prior to any sort of remediation. There needs to be sensitivity to genetic and functional predispositioning that modifies and shapes our language and much of our conscious behaviors. (This st= udy is more fully examined in my paper, A First Look at <= /p>

Phenomenol= ogy.

Memory that has its own mysterious dimensions also needs to be considered in this groundwork. To undertake the = study of memory and how it functions is a lifetime venture. There is great danger in trying to summarize what is known about memory. Knowing that what you will be taught about it may be flawed gives you permission to leave the door open to further thought and study. Here are some thoughts about memor= y that need to be thought.

= ;

Bernard Ba= ars provides the most comprehendible model for thinking about memory in this context. Baars is a neuroscie= ntist of note who, with his associate Roger Penrose, did some of the most interes= ting work ever done on memory. Baa= rs has constructed a metaphorical description of how we come to remember that is a= bit simplistic and at the same time quite complicated. He envisions the individual in a t= heater watching his own consciousness unfold on a lighted stage. The brain through a sensory, fundamentally unconscious, process receives the activities on the stage. That is, things are recorded witho= ut interpretation and simply (not really so simple) modify cells that may eventually be “processed” in forming an explanation, understand= ing, or interpretation of the events at some future time. While “watching” this process, the brain also collects impressions about how it functions. That tends to reify many of the brain’s operational functions.

= ;

Some cellu= lar data “hang around” for no discernable purpose and form part of = an unconscious platform on which some activities seem to go on beneath the lev= el of full consciousness. Some of these data may be exhibited in dream states (see I told you we would get ba= ck to Freud) that are difficult if not impossible to translate because the fro= ntal lobes are inactive during the REM dream state. Some of the cellular activity is carefully scrutinized and becomes part of what Gerald Edelman refers to as = working memory. This is where we are enabled to get about in the world, to facilitate our wishes and desires, and where we connect with those around us.&nbs= p; Working memory is surely implicated in learning, acquisition, and recognition of moods, objects, and faces.&= nbsp; Edelman does not include this in his model, but it seems appropriate= to extend the model to suggest that as a greater segment of his stage is not “seen,” one may have less facility with life skills and recall. Perhaps as one ages o= r is challenged by Alzheimer’s syndrome, the lights in the theater grow di= mmer and the action on the stage is less available for processing but this is a lifetime performance. This is= a simplified, mini-look at a possible way to think about memory. Nevertheless, it is not very good without some supportive explanations. Here are a few.

= ;

During all= of the brain activity described above, there is of course a symphony of other brain functions occurring in a variety of neural regions. These functions account for a cont= inuous stream of resulting metaphorical description to shape and form consciousness. If you are to = be a thoughtful diagnostician, you need to recognize the primary functions. Take a deep breath and we will do = this as painlessly as possible. As stated above, memory study is a science in and of itself; so we will undert= ake a rudimentary peek here.

= ;

First, it should be stated that memories and emotions are generated, recorded, classified, and “stored” by a set of brain components once refe= rred to as the limbic system. You = may continue to read this term in the literature, but it has been supplanted. What was once thought to be a syst= em is now seen as a set of contiguous tissues and cell sets forming a process but= not a system. You ought to know t= he terms amygdala, hippocampus, parahippocampus, and striatum. These glands/organs are singular in function but are “bound” (This term was first used in this cont= ext in 1909 by Will James) together to produce and grasp memory. Exactly how these pieces of tissue function is not fully understood but a considerable amount is known by observing damaged tissue to see what does not happen. Here is a simplified look at the process. If we divide whole m= emory into three kinds of memory, procedural memo= ry (muscular, skeletal-motor), emotional memory (autonomic), and declarative me= mory (substantial, knowledge-based) we can then trace backwards to how they are formed. Better said, we can t= race back to where they are formed and intuit the rest. The amygdala, hippocampus, parahip= pocampus, and the striatum are the recipients of massive sensory input. To some degree, knowing what sort = of data stimulates each or all of them indicates what they probably do. <= /o:p>

= ;

Each of th= ese organs mediates the information received and interprets and stimulates a conjunctive response. Further= , the process of the amygdala appears to determine how critical a response to incoming data is necessary and acts on it accordingly. The determination may be registere= d by the speed of the incoming impulses, the force, or the constituents in the chemicals that are excreted. = That phase of the process is still being carefully examined. In sum, a chorus line of cell sets= and functions of specific tissues produce modified cells that carry memory trac= ts that can be retrieved intentionally or unintentionally. All of these processes can be imag= ined as loops, ending where they began and beginning again!

= ;

Now after = that short but essential side trip we are ready for the business of getting back= to “loops.” The imag= e of biological loops should be etched into your own memory tracts for future reference. Think of them not = only being cell-fiber based but as a loop of association. This is different from the traditi= onal notion of cause and effect in that the loop has neither obvious beginning n= or object as an end. It is a muc= h more aesthetic way to think in that it has no place to stop. Well there are loops going on in t= he brain all the time and the memory described above takes the form of a senso= ry input loop. Sensory input bec= omes a stimulus that becomes impulse that becomes output that becomes stimuli all = over again. And there you have the= loop.

= ;

Here is wh= ere it begins to fit together. Se= nsory loops transmit information to the brain, much of it below the conscious level. There it is acted upon= by the amygdala and taken as significant or discharged. This act or series of acts is extr= emely complex but there are two parts of the act that ought to be known in a diagnostic sense. One is that memory is involved here. The = amygdala is tempered by the experience of the organism or, in other words, it has be= en “trained” by experience. The training may go like this. If there are already memory tracts to suggest that in-coming data has purpose and “fits” into a cellular matrix, it is likely process= ed and receives attention. If th= ere is no preceding data, the in-coming data dissipates or dissolves. (We will nee= d to talk about this.)

= ;

All of this goes on at 40-Hertz. There is= a continuous oscillation synchronizing the “relevant neurons” that provides a rhythmic pattern for sensory input and processing. In common language, it could be sa= id that the entire “loop process” is vibrating. Hold this thought as it will be cr= itical to some diagnostic protocols later in this paper. It is wise to remind you that this information is a composite view of where the thinking about sensory looping= is in this stage of the art of neuroscience and it may be supplanted as more d= ata are developed. However, and t= his is important, this composite might be tinkered with but has been quite well or= ganized in the sciences by some of the best minds in the field.
= ;

So here is what we have at this juncture. Levels four, five, and six exchange in-coming sensory data---testing= it for significance and accepting it as an essential memory contribution or rejecting it for its lack of relevance.&nb= sp; This process is done in nanoseconds and is consciously unattended. It is all in the loop. One further thing here, the attend= ant results of this process are of patterned cellular significance, but in orde= r to take the form of conscious application they need to become language-based.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> If the vocabulary is missing, the = loop exchanges the data or the results of the data and significance is again tested. That is why (well, on= e of the reasons) Whorf (and I) want you to think “language before thought.”   Vocabul= ary rules!

= ;

Given the preceding biological platform, the next step can be taken in this journey toward successful diagnosis protocols.&nbs= p; First, a reminder that there are some players on this stage who have= not gotten “billing” in this set of descriptions. Genetics are involved at a very fundamental level. Introducin= g that science here would involve a bundle of speculations that are far too complex for simple explanation. It is= an emerging science that has had some extraordinary advances recently with mor= e to come. Let us just state this,= there are good genes and better ones. The mapping that has been completed recently confirms that it is better to have= the better ones.

= ;

The second player has to do with health and hydration. Whole books have been devoted to “wet-brain” theories. It seems certain that hydration is essential to higher-order brain functioning. There are no dat= a to the contrary. Without doubt g= ood, static health is a critical player here.&n= bsp; This health concept needs to be understood in physical and emotional terms. As science advances and becomes more sophisticated, a greater capability to treat disease and reorganize negative conditions will emerge through understanding these relationships.

= ;

There you = have a platform on which to set the diagnostic protocols that are going to be addressed in the remainder of this paper.&= nbsp; As professional educators, you will take these data and tailor them = to fit your diagnostic and instructional profiles. Some areas of understanding ought = to be treated as orthodox while some parts are open to interpretation---not the d= ata, but its application. Part II = of this paper will be more operational in nature and used to develop a diagnos= is profile that will be shaped to fit individual instructional patterns. Of course, ongoing dialogue about = brain function and how it relates to knowledge acquisition is needed. This is not just a study, as it re= quires sensitive and careful application. <= /span>Crafting a diagnostic profile is an intricate process that requires incisive insight= , patience, and time to import data as it becomes available. From a scientific perspective, thi= s is professional activity at its very best.

= ;

PART II

Educational Diagnosis

B= efore launching into this section, it is wise to take out a bit of insurance by w= ay of a couple of reminders. Prelim= inary to any intentional diagnostic, it is essential to know the learner as a functioning human being. Revi= ew likes and dislikes (tastes, perhaps), develop an informed guess about the physical and emotional health of the learner, and do some thinking about so= me of the learner’s intentions.

= ;

This part = of the paper will be divided into 1) a set of presumptions about neuro-appropr= iate instruction as a way of looking at the issues of sensory input, 2) a look at what may misfire in instructional presentations, and 3) a few modest suggestions about treatment of learning difficulties. This is the place where you as a professional educator need to examine how this information fits your protoc= ols and perform modifications as needed.

=

Pre-diagnostic presumptions about instruction<= /i>

  &nb= sp;       Reduced stress in all learning enviro= nments

  &nb= sp;            =     Stimulation without threat

  &nb= sp;            =     Non-intrusive physical settings

  &nb= sp;            =     Easy access to hydration

  &nb= sp;            =     Clearly developed and consistently applied expectations

  &nb= sp;

  &nb= sp;       Instruction that meets a criterion for being neuro-appropriate

  &nb= sp;            =     Instruction organized to meet what is already known

  &nb= sp;            =     Consistent presentation of vocabulary new and reviewed

  &nb= sp;            =     An intentional rhythm to all presentations

  &nb= sp;            =     The judicious use of repetitions and summaries

  &nb= sp;            =     An ongoing assessment of achievement

  &nb= sp;            =     Careful application of “interrogative forms” of instruction<= /span>

  &nb= sp;            =     The use of anecdotal notation for learning profile development

<= o:p>

D= iagnosis of potential misfiring in sensory in-put

  &nb= sp;       Things to look at and for =

Lack of or incomplete foundation on which to premise “new” instructional presentation= s

Lack of vocabulary or lexic= on with which to learn and decode material being presented
Speed and rhythm may mismat= ch that of the learner

Lack of or disorganized previous referential experience

Organic or emotional stress= and suppression (Generally this takes the form of shyness, inability to attend,= or declarations of irrelevance.)

  &nb= sp;       Things to inventory

  &nb= sp;            =     Vocabulary

  &nb= sp;            =     Health

  &nb= sp;            =     Stability

  &nb= sp;       Things to sense about yourself

Instructional vocabulary

Sensitivity to the burdens = of failure

Subtle or active competitio= ns with winners and losers

Understanding of the application of rhythm in instruction

Over dependence on order for the appearance of acquisition of knowledge

Careful preparations with individualized learning styles in mind and plan

A= few modest suggestions for improving potential learning

<= o:p>

  &nb= sp;       To be done with dispatch

  &nb= sp;            =     A vocabulary inventory

  &nb= sp;            =     Assessment of the Dominance Profile of the learner

  &nb= sp;            =     Note of the learning history

  &nb= sp;            =     Profile of the support system of the learner

  &nb= sp;            =     Profile of apparent distractions

  &nb= sp;       Long-term activity that begins NOW

  &nb= sp;            =     Development of opportunities for shared experiences

  &nb= sp;            =     Inventory academic (learning) strengths

  &nb= sp;            =     Profile of personal interests

  &nb= sp;            =     Listen for vocabulary manipulation and strength

  &nb= sp;            =     Urge opportunities for directed conversations

  &nb= sp;            =     Advocate some level of participation in aesthetic activity

= ;

Part III

This is the clinical phase of this work. = We must examine many things as brain function is better understood, as clinical vocabulary becomes more familiar, and as images develop. There must be grounding in the “loop theory” that populates the first segment of this paper. Take some time to examine M. C. Escher’s art. Study the paradoxicon that is included here; search for others, they are out there. Set aside some time to listen clos= ely to some of the music of J. S. Bach and other Baroque masters. Give thought to the concepts of sy= mmetry and asymmetry (brain function is both).&nb= sp; Study Gödel‘s Theorem or read Douglas Hofstadter’s wonderful book, Gödel, Escher,= and Bach (1980). (This is the= most powerful book of its sort in Western literature). Even though these things may feel = a bit odd to you, just flat do it!

= ;

Part II of this work should be taken as a structure for growth and development. Each item of that section is a cal= l for study. Underlying it all, how= ever, is the need for you to know all that you can assimilate about brain organization and function.

        &= nbsp;

To complete this paper three additional pieces need to be added for your understanding. First, examine= Paul MacLean’s metaphor, the triune brain. MacLean developed this metaphor in= 1990 in his book titled, The Triune Brai= n. It is a foundational construct of neuroscience to exhibit the three interactive brain segments. This metaphor shows the ancient br= ain (reptilian), the paleomammalian brain (limbic system), and the neomammalian brain (new brain). Only the h= uman specie has the neomammalian cortex and, therefore, ways of the world that a= re not available to other species. MacLean says that each one of these brains is distinguished by what = it does and can do. Taking this further, one must consider what each brain can “know” and how it can be taught. The reptilian = brain is relativity impervious to “learning” but susceptible to primi= tive conditioning. The limbic brai= n can be reflexively trained, but not taught.   The new brain can be taught = by retrogression and interpretation.

        &= nbsp;

This metap= hor deserves careful study as it sets a boundary for understanding function<= /u> and organization. MacL= ean holds that much of the way we know the world is, in fact, illusory due to t= he relationship of the tertiary brain features. In cases like pediatric dyslexia, = the learning deficiency is the result of a misshapened illusion and easily treatable. You will find out = that the relationship of these three brains may have a direct impact on the way people receive and communicate descriptions. Back to loops!
        &= nbsp;

Second, le= arn more about hemisphericity. Learn about the left and right hemispheres and their unique functions and relationship to and with each other.   Hemispheric enco= ding is a precise science and requires the study of cell clusters, specificity of cell types, and the patterning and looping of each segment. This information is essential for thinking about dominance profiles and for understanding what appears to be natural learning proclivity, or talent, in some children. This is an exciting study and it w= ill provide insights that are critical to all forms of instruction.<= /span>

        &= nbsp;

The third = part requires some depth of study in addition to your understanding about intelligence. Today’s education spends much time and effort classifying learners into myriad cate= gories based on assumptions about their ability to grasp information or to surrend= er themselves to a variety of institutional expectations. It is necessary to re-examine these practices in view of present neural data.&= nbsp; It is helpful to differentiate between schooling and educa= tion in order to recognize the impositi= on of institutional expectations as they relate to learning. The most critical imposition is th= e one made between so-called vocational training and academic preparation. What is going on from a brain perspective here? Your insigh= ts and attitudes will be invaluable in this part of the study.
= ;

Epilogue

Now for so= me editorializing: Public educat= ion is under assault from many directions. My neuro-epistemological work has taken me to many schools in many states. In some, public schoo= ls are in a social and intellectual turmoil that cannot be changed by money, chang= es in status, and certainly not by standardized testing. The one factor that can make a vit= al difference is to improve first the life of the teacher and second to broaden how teachers consider the problem of the acquisition and retention of knowl= edge and skills. Neuroscientific i= nsight is one piece of that field for serious consideration.

The brain = is the last frontier of our understanding of the human specie and it is the mo= st democratic of all of our possessions. Your study of the concepts and insights encouraged in this paper is = at your own pleasure. You do not= have to do it and you can still teach, of course. However, you have my promise that = if you take this study seriously you will improve your instructional profile on so= me or many levels. I guarantee that. More importantly, if yo= u come to this information full heartedly you will improve the lives of some or ma= ny of the people you teach. I guarantee that with even greater vigor.        =             &nb= sp;

= ;

= ;

        =             &nb= sp;            =         References

Baars, B. J. (1988). A cognitive theory of consciousness. NY: Cambridge Universit= y Press.

Dennett, D. (1991). Consciou= sness explained. Boston: Little, Brown.

Edelman, G. et.al. (Eds.), (1984). Dynamic aspects of neocortical function. NY: J. Wiley.

Escher, M. C. (1960). The gr= aphic work of M. C. Escher. (Translated by John E. Brigham).&nb= sp; NY: Hawthorn.

Harth, E. (1993). The creative loop: How brains make a mind. MA: Addison-Wesley.

Heidegger, M. (1959). On the= way to language. (Translated = by Peter Hartz). NY: Harper and = Row.

Hofstadter, D. R. (1989). G&= ouml;del, Escher, Bach: An eternal golden braid.= NY: Vintage Books.

Keyes, C. D. (1998). Brain m= ystery light and dark: The rhythm and harmony of consciousness. NY: Routledge.
MacLean, P. (1990). Triune b= rain in evolution. NY: Plenum = Press.

Peel, T. (1977). The neuroanatomic basis for clinical neurology. NY: McGraw-Hill.=

Scott, A. (1995). Stairway to the mind: The controversial new science of consciousness. NY: Springer-Verlag.

Whorf, B. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. (Ed= ited by John B. Carroll). Cambridge: MIT.

Peel, T. (1977). The neuroanatomic basis for clinical neurology. NY: McGraw-Hill.=

Scott, A. (1995). Stairway to the mind: The controversial new science of consciousness. NY: Springer-Verlag.

Whorf, B. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. (Ed= ited by John B. Carroll). Cambridge: MIT.