Neurodynamic Models of Brain in Psychiatry

Abstract

The history of brain theory is described in terms of three kinds of theory of perception. The most widely used kind sees perception as dependent on passive inflow from the environment of information that is used to make and process representations of objects and events. A second kind views perception as an active search for information that is inherent in the environment and is extracted by tuned resonances in brain circuits. A third kind holds that perception works by the creation of information through chaotic dynamics by forming hypotheses about the environment, through which learning takes place. Experimental evidence for creative dynamics in brains is briefly sketched. The explanation is offered that brains, being finite systems, work this way in order to cope with the infinite complexity of the world. All that brains can know is the hypotheses they construct and the results of testing them by acting into the environment, and learning by assimilation from the sensory consequences of their actions. The process is described as intentionality. It works through the action-perception-assimilation cycle. The cost of this solution to the problem of infinite complexity by hypothesis testing is the progressive isolation of individuals, as they accumulate their unique experiences through which their personalities form. Socialization and the acquisition of shared knowledge requires the emergence of new personality structure by self-organization through chaotic dissolution of existing the structure, as a prelude to the creation of new traits, habits, and values. Dissolution works in a crisis situation by regression to earlier stages of development, from which a fresh start can be made. A state of malleability emerges in the depth of crisis, in which compassionate companions through loving care can invite cooperative actions. Joint actions support the growth of a new lifestyle based on trust. Socialization requires neurochemical mechanisms of affiliation and bonding that evolved through the requirements of parental care of altricial offspring in mammalian reproduction. These mechanisms are invoked by means of behavioral techniques from cultural evolution. The dynamics, neural mechanisms, behavioral signs, methods of induction, and therapeutic utility of dissolution should be known by therapists. Lack of recognition and understanding may cause failure to use brief windows of opportunity to instill long-term relief of psychic pain by restructuring intentionality in distressed patients.

Behavioral functions of the mesolimbic dopaminergic system: An affective neuroethological perspective

“…The generation of gamma rhythms is essential for synaptic plasticity and memory processes (Paulsen and Sejnowski 2000;Buzsáki and Draguhn 2004;Sederberg et al, 2006), voluntary movement execution (Cassidy et al, 2002;Countermanche et al, 2003;Kuhn et al, 2004;Sharot et al, 2005), attentive functions (Brown, 2003), and "binding of sensory object features into a coherent conscious percept" (Engel and Singer 2001). It has also been suggested that gamma waves preside over the emergence of active intentional brain states (Freeman, 2003), which underlie all of the above mentioned functions.…”

Simulated Apoptosis/Neurogenesis Regulates Learning and Memory Capabilities of Adaptive Neural Networks

“…Corticosteroid-mediated stress responses associated with significant contextual or psychosocial changes may thus serve as a normal mechanism involved in the instigation of increased neural turnover. The HPA system and the neurogenic hippocampus may biologically substantiate the process of dissolution, which 'prepares for new learning by self-organization, whereby the pre-existing life history of an individual is transiently weakened, even melted down, so that new structure can grow that is not logically consistent with all that has come before' (Freeman, 2003). However, a variety of affective, anxiety, and stressrelated psychiatric and/or personality disorders may result from genetic differences and/or environmental exposures that impact a variety of parameters controlling neuronal turnover.…”

Neurodynamics of Mind: The Arrow Illusion of Conscious Intentionality as Downward Causation

“…Many authors share the belief that explanations in terms of downward causation can explain intentionality, conscious subjectivity or meaning (Barham 1996;Edelman 2004;Freeman 1999Freeman , 2000Freeman , 2003Freeman , 2004Haken 2003;Harter and Kozma 2005;Ibáñez 2007a, b;Ibáñez and Cosmelli 2008;Juarrero 1999;Kelso 1995Kelso , 2002Kelso , 2003Orsucci 2002;Petitot 1995;Tschacher and Dauwalder 2003;Thelen 1995;Thompson and Varela 2001;van Orden and Holden 2002). Promisingly, the explanation based on downward causation may solve the mind-body issue.…”

“…Bechtel 1998;Bechtel and Richardson 1993;Chemero 2001;Clark 1997;Barham 1996;Edelman 2004;Freeman 1999Freeman , 2000Freeman , 2003Freeman , 2004Haken 2003;Harter and Kozma 2005;Ibáñez 2007a, b;Juarrero 1999;Kelso 1995Kelso , 2002Kelso , 2003Orsucci 2002;Petitot 1995;Tschacher and Dauwalder 2003;Thelen 1995;Thompson and Varela 2001;van Orden and Holden 2002, among others). Such concept of "emergence" may seem advantageous over the typical physicalist explanation, since it allows for notions of pluricausality and macrocausation.…”