Ramil Garifullin is an associate professor at KFU, Candidate of Psychological Sciences, author and founder of the theory of existom and nanopsychology.
NANOPSYCHOLOGY AND SPECIFIC NEURONS. When I was developing a new science of nanopsychology, I was looking for key structural elements of the brain (the molecular structure of the brain) that, by changing their state, could influence the mental processes of the psyche (perception, thinking, memory, etc.). Various foreign and domestic authors have shown that there are such specific neurons that, as brain triggers, connect It combines the regulation of a complex neural network and the complex interaction of a functional system of neurons. These triggers are triggered as a kind of integral point of interaction between many neurons or many groups of neurons. The question of how much they are triggers or triggers of mental processes is an important problem. How these triggers read information from different groups of neurons, different ensembles of groups of neurons, and just ensembles of neurons is a daunting task.
The problem of how specific neurons underlie the subjective semantic process and behavior has become acute.
How specific can neurons be triggers that give a command to the actions of an animal or a human? To what extent are these neurons some kind of aggregators, some kind of information "bank" in which key information about the whole system is concentrated? To what extent do these neurons contain key information in a collapsed and compressed format about the interaction of the giant hypernetwork system of the brain, which is the basis for generating mental and mental processes? Here are the key questions.
Here we are talking not just about coding, but about some compressed and dense information about complex various processes.
There are neurons that contain relatively simple information. Specific neurons contain more complex structures. Therefore, the problem arises: what is the difference between these different neurons? Why are specific neurons capable of complex operations, while other neurons perform simpler operations?
It is clear that neurons have their own difficulties. After all, there are brain structures that don't have neurons.
What are the key mechanisms of action on the biological macromolecules of the brain responsible for the activity of the above brain triggers?
To what extent is the fixation of states and processes of a specific neuron uniquely related to the behavior of an animal and its mental processes? How unambiguously and realistically does this correlate with the mental processes that occur in the experiment. It would be good if the experimenters recorded everything in the "here and now" mode, that is, in real time. For example, when an experimental animal would perform some kind of action and an internal mental act, the time when it was perfect would be recorded. And on the other hand, the structure, the reaction in the brain that took place at that time would have been recorded the same time. In order to strengthen this unambiguity, it is necessary to apply the foundations of nanopsychology that I have developed.
If we learn in the "here and now" mode with the help of artificially introduced molecular nanostructures to temporarily disable the key molecular mechanisms occurring in a specific neuron that causes the mental and semantic processes of choosing a certain object by an animal, then we can talk about the molecular control of the mental and semantic process of an animal.
It is important to remember that the mental or mental behavior of the animal is not directly observed. We only see the action of the animal, not the processes that take place in the brain. At the same time, we can record either some activity of a neuron or a group of neurons, or molecular activity in the structures of this neuron. It is important to find such a molecular activity or marker that would be unambiguously associated with the corresponding semantic, mental and mental processes. It is important to find molecular semantic markers that uniquely correspond only to certain mental and semantic processes and structures.
Thus, the problem of unambiguity is well solved with the help of nanopsychology.
AMBIGUITY OF SPECIFIC NEURONS. Open specific neurons that combine different groups of neurons and ensembles of neurons, that is, combine large functional systems, contribute to the ability to control mental processes through the control of specific neurons and even through the control of molecular protein structures that are included in neurons and set their activity. Thus, thanks to nanopsychology, the task of controlling the psyche with the help of nanomolecular structures, molecular structures or other structures is set in the "here and now" mode, and not with a delay (usually there is a study of the structures of the system after the reaction of this system). In other words, it opens up the possibility of observing the correlation between changes in molecular structural and mental processes in real time. This is made possible by the discovery and justification of specific neurons that are involved in the mental and mental processes of the brain.
Thus, it becomes possible to register the key processes of generating the subjective world of a person in certain areas of the brain. This zone, in particular, may be the key molecular processes occurring in a specific neuron. This opportunity can be the key to influencing mental and mental processes. This is the concept of nanopsychology, which I formulated back in 2006, developing the hypothetical science of nanopsychology, which was supposed to study the correlation between nanostructural transformations of the brain and mental processes in the "here and now" mode. Then I raised the question of the possibility of researching such correlations. Then the conditions were described under which it would be possible to control mental processes using controlled nanostructures. To do this, it was necessary to have key local brain structures similar to specific neurons, acting on which with the help of externally controlled nanoparticles embedded in the brain, molecular control of mental processes with the help of an external operator would become possible.
THE GAP BETWEEN THE HYPERNET AND THE SUBJECTIVE WORLD. The theory of the hypernet remains at the level of theory, which is not sufficiently supported by experiments. There is a lot of research concerning our mental sphere and thinking. These studies are mainly done within the framework of descriptive psychology and introspection. On the other hand, there is a lot of research on neurophysiology and neurobiology of the brain. The problem of the gap between the research of the mental sphere and the corresponding brain processes has not yet been solved. In fact, on the one hand, there is a huge number of scientific models associated with the material substance of the brain, that is, with neurobiological foundations. On the other hand, there is a huge amount of information related to our semantic structures and internal mental formations.
When we consider the neurobiological and molecular structures of the brain, we do so in the context of mental processes that we know from the inside based on introspection. It is a mental reductionism that influences neurobiological reductionism. Moreover, it influences neurology and neurobiological interpretations. Conversely, we often extend neurobiological metaphor and logic to our mental and mental processes.
If we talk about thought only on the basis of neurobiological and neurophysiological concepts, then the knowledge of the mechanisms of thought formation does not become deeper. Similarly, if a balalaika player knows the methods of mathematical physics of the string well, then it will not be better to play the balalaika.
MECHANISMS FOR BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN THE HYPERNET AND THE SUBJECTIVE WORLD. In fact, there is still a gap between the hypernet and the subjective world. This gap can only be bridged by investigating real mechanisms that need to be experimentally proven. Only in this case can we say that this gap has been overcome.
Are there any experimental data that we can use to reduce this gap? Are there experimental brain correlates of mental processes? First, it is necessary to establish an unambiguous correlation between hypernet processes and neural network processes in the "here and now" mode. And here we go back to nanopsychology.
The gap between a hypernet and a neural network can only be bridged with the help of the science of nanopsychology. To do this, we must look for correlations between mental processes and molecular transformations in the brain. That is, to look for key nanomalecular transformations that lead to mental formations. It is necessary to identify correlations between mental processes and molecular processes in the control mode, and not with a delay, as is usually the case in experiments on brain neurobiology.
THE PSYCHIC WORLD AND THE BLACK BOX. The problem of unambiguity in the study of closed and implicit systems is a black box problem. We measure how this system reacts to the impact. Then, based on the information received, we determine the structure of the system. However, this system can be so complex that it is necessary to consider various reasons for the formation of a particular response when exposed to this system.
It is clear that all these three components: the entrance, the black box and the exit are a structure that is located in the objective world, that is, outside of us. Then, when the psyche itself is the black box, the problem seems to be alleviated. The psyche is felt by ourselves at the level of mental processes. We can measure the external impact on the psyche. Then we can see our mental reaction and measure it too, according to a subjective scale. All this is possible if we are talking about the psyche. If we examine the brain, then the problem becomes more complicated due to the fact that the brain itself becomes this black box. The brain is in the objective world along with the input and output. The brain is an objective material substrate that is outside of our mental processes. Our mental processes do not allow us to perceive the contents of the brain and its processes. At the same time, mental processes allow us to perceive mental content.
The brain is a unique substrate that generates something mental in itself, but this mental does not consist of real material and field particles of the brain, which at the same time take an important part in the generation of the mental and subjective world.
The brain is a part of nature. The brain is something that is outside our mental world, but at the same time, the mental is born in it.
But how much can we study the black box called the brain? If we study it as physicists, then mental processes themselves become a black box. If we study the brain as psychologists, then the processes of the brain itself become a black box. We can see mental content from the inside and express it to the researcher. But to what extent do all these mental processes correlate with brain processes?
THE GAP BETWEEN THE HYPERNET AND THE SUBJECTIVE WORLD: A COMPUTER METAPHOR AS A HINDRANCE. On the one hand, there is neurobiological, neural network, and neurobiological models of the brain. On the other hand, there is psychology as a science that studies the patterns of mental processes. There is a hypernet that is built on top of the neurobiological neural network. The hypernet theory arose on the basis of a computer metaphor and the development of information technology.
There is a big gap between mental processes and the neurobiological neural network.
Our brain has learned to think about itself, that is, about its foundations.
Our brain itself is not able to immanently apply knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of thinking to change the processes of thinking. If, with the help of this knowledge, there is an influence on the brain from the outside, then a change in thinking is possible.
THE RABBIT AND THE MENTAL WORLD. In an experiment with a rabbit (with the right ring or the left pedal, or vice versa), when the rabbit learns certain skills and selects the signs of an object: right or left, pedal or ring, there is a problem of unambiguity. To what extent do the signals and neuro-markers of the brain's reactions to signs, to the right and left, to the pedal and the ring, uniquely correspond to the left and right, pedals and the ring as images-contents of the mental world? If the observed reactions of brain markers unambiguously correspond to the contents of the rabbit's mental or phenomenological world, then we can say that researchers have indeed and unambiguously found correlates between gene expressions and their corresponding mental processes. In fact, most of these experiments are not done in real time, that is, not when brain reactions and animal behavior are observed simultaneously. Moreover, this ambiguity is facilitated by disturbances and interference associated with data acquisition and processing conducted in the lag mode.
The question arises, what do we mean by the psychic world? If we understand the mental world only as scattered signals that we register due to the plasticity of the brain and memory processes, then this is not enough. If there are no correlations with behavior and there are no associative interactions of these signals with each other, then, apparently, it is impossible to talk about brain markers and indicators of mental and intellectual processes of the animal's brain.
In animal experiments, the above correlations and associations between signals are often missing, and therefore the data obtained are not a manifestation of the contents of the mental world. These studies hardly bring us close to the fact that we will ever be able to describe the mental and psychic world through penetration and connection to the brain. Other trips are needed.
THE RABBIT'S LEFT AND RIGHT SIGNALS: THE PSYCHIC WORLD. In the rabbit experiment, there is a right and left signal. These are not mental processes and not a sequence of actions. This is something far from fixing the sequence of actions and learning ability. The algorithm and structure of actions have not yet been identified, but only a complex signal takes place that allows the animal to behave in the same way with the left ring or with the right pedal. The authors of the article claim that various neuro-markers react to various signs of objects. But is such a conclusion a window or a bridge to the psychic world?
It is necessary to complicate the system and tasks. In particular, it is possible to change the conditions and signs of objects perceived by the animal. For example, if this ring has a different shape (epileptoid) or if this system of foraging has a different mechanism.
Therefore, research needs to be brought to the identification of unambiguity.
LISTENING AND SEEING THE INNER WORLD OF A PERSON WITH THE HELP OF DEVICES. Currently, it has become possible to observe the activity of various neurons and groups of neurons in various areas of the brain responsible for various mental processes. Various physical methods for recording the activity of various neurons have been invented.
At the genetic level, certain agents are inserted into the structures of the neuron, which are activated when they are exposed to light of a certain wavelength. Researchers have learned how to register the activity of neurons in the process of animal behavior. This is the complex dynamics of neurons. This dynamic is first recorded and then programmed.
Similar studies have begun with humans. For example, if a person is deaf and dumb, but at the same time pronounces a sentence to himself that he wants to say, then the activity of neurons corresponding to this process of internal speech is studied. Then the program processes the activity of neurons and, based on the received semantics, generates an audio sentence. As a result, we can hear what a deaf-mute person wanted to say.
Research is underway in the field of connectome and artificial intelligence related to the display of human images and representations on a monitor. So far, these are just general pictures that capture only the essence of the subject and they are far from a specific individual image.
NEURONS OF TIME AND SPACE. The processes of encoding various mental processes in human interaction with the outside world are studied. All this is recorded using instruments. Then mathematical processing is done and with the help of artificial intelligence, some supposed meaning is found, which corresponds to the processes that took place in the corresponding groups of neurons, ensembles of groups of neurons, at various levels of the hierarchy of the hypernet of the brain.
Studies by some authors have discovered the behavior of neurons in the perception of space. The spatial perception of a person is investigated.
WHERE TO GO WHEN STUDYING THE BRAIN? Currently, there is an acute problem with the direction of research related to the connection between the brain and the mental world. Guidelines, concepts and the right methodology are needed to solve this problem. This problem concerns neuroscience, neuroscience, cognitome science and cognitome sciences.
We see the psychic world from the inside. At the same time, we do not know the mechanisms of generation of our mental and subjective world. In which direction do researchers need to go in order to understand the mechanisms of generating the mental world?
A paradox arises. In the natural sciences, setting research goals is comparatively easier compared to our above problem. When studying the natural scientific mechanisms of generating the mental world, we somehow need to go to ourselves. With the help of introspection and approaches of scientific psychology, we can explain what is happening in our inner mental world. There are good psychological models, but they have nothing to do with the brain mechanisms that generate our mental or mental world. We are moving towards uncovering these mechanisms. It would seem that the goal is simple – to identify the mechanisms of how the mental world is generated from non-mental (biophysical, neurobiological, etc.) processes of the brain, filled with the process of thinking, awareness, feeling, etc.
So far, we don't know enough about how this mental world is generated as a result of brain activity. Some ordinary people do not see the need to engage in brain research in this direction, they say, the brain works fine on its own. They argue that there is no need to investigate the mechanisms of consciousness, since it was formed without knowledge of these brain mechanisms. They say that in the process of such research, we will not be able to change consciousness in any way, since we will never know its key mechanisms. On the other hand, practice shows that we can change consciousness using the methods of practical psychology, through the interaction of people with each other, through human interaction with the world. But is it possible to change and develop consciousness by introducing it into the neurobiological and biophysical mechanisms of brain activity? This is not possible yet. So far, there are only neurosurgical operations associated with impaired brain activity due to various factors. There is a problem of brain dysfunction, psychopathology and various diseases related to the brain. But this is not the level of resolution of the above problem.
BRAIN SLICES: PROBLEMS OF SCIENTIFIC CORRECTNESS. There are methods to selectively study the activity of individual neurons. This was made possible by optogenetic registration of processes in neurons. This approach allows us to study neural ensembles and groups. This is relevant from the point of view of studying the processes of consciousness and various mental processes.
On the other hand, there is the problem of researching more stable brain structures responsible for long-term memory.
It is necessary to study the brain processes of the formation of the mental world. This is relevant from the point of view of eliminating mental disorders, malfunctions of consciousness and various brain dysfunctions.
CLASSICAL AND NON-CLASSICAL APPROACHES TO THE BRAIN. The concept of the life world occupies a special place in phenomenology. From the point of view of fundamental psychology, on the one hand, there is an apperceptive subject, and, on the other, a sensory one. An apperceptive object is a product of cultural development. A sensory object is a universal object, as if it were the same for everyone.
We are less deluded in this world because we live in a sensory world. If we all lived in an apperceptive world, we would get lost.
There are nonlinear systems described by nonlinear differential equations. These are systems that are unpredictable because they react to an unpredictable environment, changing in a changing world. Such a system may be inanimate.
Later, a subject or an observer appeared in science with his indignation at the world. In Einstein's theory, a man appeared with his own pole of physicality, anthropomorphism, mathematics, and cultural constants. But nature is irreducible to the human phenomenon. Nature exists by itself and does not depend on the observer.
There is an anthropomorphic subjectivism. For example, the decimal system of mathematics, which is associated with ten fingers.
The observer introduces his indignation. So, for example, when studying the brain reactions of animals, the researcher talks about the right ring and the left pedal, which the animal presses to eat. In this case, the researcher, with his subjectivism and humanization of the animal, often incorrectly describes the behavior of the animal. This is the grossest mistake of animal trainers! Therefore, it is necessary to take into account this disturbance and error. This is relevant when we are trying to solve the problem of connection and correlation between the mental world and the brain, It is with this in mind that all conceptual theoretical positions used in the study of the brain and the mental world should be developed and formed.
It will be possible to achieve a scientific novelty that would revolutionize this area only if there is a correct theory and methodology. The solution to this problem will be possible if our philosophizing and thinking about the brain and the mental world lead us to conceptual positions previously not presented by anyone.
A METHODOLOGICAL DEAD END IN APPROACHES TO THE GAP BETWEEN THE BRAIN AND THE MENTAL WORLD. Some kind of disturbance may occur in the system, which will cause an implicit cause of gene expression. This will lead to ambiguous conclusions. As a result, it would be incorrect to attribute gene expression directly to mental processes. Often, insufficient attention is paid to the analysis of such ambiguity due to the complexity of the brain system.
ETHNOPHILOSOPHY AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE COGNITION OF THE MECHANISMS OF THE PHENOMENON OF SUBJECTIVITY IN THE BRAIN. All our misconceptions are often associated with the inertia of our thinking caused by the desire for comfort. There is a mental defense based on the formation of stable structures that would not cause stress.
According to some studies, the brain behaves in such a way that it seeks certainty. The brain works in such a way as to save its energy for its current or upcoming activities. The brain doesn't like uncertainties.
Everything flows and changes, but the brain often does not take this into account, being within the framework of former conventions. This is where all our mistakes and misconceptions lie.
In Chinese philosophy, there are methods of education and training in which a child is taught to always make adjustments for changes so that he does not parasitize those pictures that were registered yesterday. Thanks to this approach, the country forming the younger generation is more viable and competitive.
CHINA IS A LEADER IN RESEARCH ON THE MECHANISMS OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND SUBJECTIVITY. In China, the number of scientific centers studying the brain is much higher than the average worldwide. There are practically no such centers in Russia at all.
There is a problem of mental disorders in China.
They are most concerned with consciousness and the theory of consciousness based on studies of brain processes.
THE NECESSITY OF PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY FOR THE STUDY OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE BRAIN. There are quite a lot of scientific publications written within the framework of descriptive psychology, but their number, despite their depth, rarely came out to solve the problem of impaired consciousness. The true criterion that knowledge is useful is knowledge that allows you to develop specific practical methods.
On this score, the philosophers did not advance at all. They did not provide anything useful and practical for solving specific problems of consciousness disturbance. Research on this subject is only now beginning. Chinese researchers in the field of consciousness are making great progress.
It is necessary to raise problems at a new level, deeply understanding the methodological problems of brain research. And for this, it is necessary to go beyond the traditional scientific fabric and traditions.
Until we solve the above methodological problems, we will not be able to conduct experiments in line with research that would really lead to real discoveries in the field of generating subjective and psychic reality. Therefore, it is impossible to ignore philosophy, to ignore something that is tuned above science.
THE INFORMATION FIELD, COGNITION-A STEP TOWARDS THE SUBJECTIVE WORLD of artificial intelligence Achievement is developing. Artificial intelligence is gradually using mathematics and physics to copy the interactions of neurons and neuron systems that take place in the brain. Neurons interact according to a certain logic and due to a certain structure of their connections.
With the help of mathematical programs, copies of this dynamics are created. The processes and activation of neurons are recorded at the level of mathematical symbols. The mathematical laws and connections of these processes are gradually being learned. The logic of interaction of ensembles of neurons is being learned. On this basis, a new cybernetics is being formed, which is no longer developing in the traditional way, as is the case with programmers. Now cybernetics is gradually developing based on the analysis and copying of the interaction of neurons, groups of neurons, neural networks and hyper networks. These new cybernetic structures were previously unknown in science. Based on this, a kind of qualitatively new information cloud is being formed. It still has little to do with our inner and subjective world generated in our brain. But at the same time, it must be recognized that this information cloud claims to become part of the foundations in the processes of generating subjective reality. Most likely, our subjective world is generated not in isolation from the information cloud and cognition formed by us through the study of brain processes.
COGNITION AS A PRODUCT OF THE IMMANENCE OF INTELLIGENCE AND THE SUBJECTIVE WORLD. In fact, cognition is a neurobiological network. This is a vision from the perspective of interactions and dynamics occurring in the neural network and hypernetwork. At the same time, the structure and number of neurons are preserved.
When we want to study the mechanisms of how our intellectual and subjective world arises, we usually describe it in terms of scientific positions and ideas that are developed in science. These ideas take place in our intellect in the form of scientific formulas that the intellect itself has created for us.
Often, some authors describe the subjective world in terms of what the brain itself has generated. In other words, there is an explanation of the processes of generation of the intellectual and subjective world at a limited immanent level. At the same time, we can characterize the processes of generating the subjective world using the cognitome model. When using the cognitome model, we try to describe a subjective sensation based on the connections of mathematical signs and symbols that the intellect itself has generated. But to what extent is such a description really a condition for bringing us closer to describing our subjective sensations?
The subjective world, in particular, the world of cognition, closes in on itself. But this closure is more indirect and complicated through a more complex system, in particular, through the cognitome system.
With this approach, we remain inside ourselves, inside our subjective reflections, although we use brain models that claim to be objective, independent of us. Here we fall into the trap of subjectivity, although we imagine that we are revealing the objective brain processes of generating subjective reality.
HUSSERL, PHENOMENOLOGY, COGNITION. We often describe subjective sensations in terms of the external world, that is, within the framework of natural sciences, which is developed in the study of nature.
Edmund Husserl worked deeply on this problem in his phenomenology and proved the existence of phenomena as the basis of our subjective world.
Husserl logically showed in his works that it is incorrect to reduce our inner world of subjective sensations to concepts within the framework of natural sciences, Our subjective world is a world of a different quality and it has its own casuistry and its own self-sufficient laws.
Therefore, Husserl has another concept instead of truth - noema. And he calls the process of cognition itself a noesis. Husserl believed that it was necessary to abandon natural science concepts in relation to the subjective world.
Phenomenology is to some extent an introspection. This is the closure of research on the most subjective world.
Our entire subjective world, including our language, grew up on the basis of nature and human interaction with the world around us. Our language is saturated with the fact that it is, on the one hand, in the brain, but at the same time it is tied to what is outside the brain, that is, to nature.
Therefore, it is necessary to work in two directions here. On the one hand, it is necessary to study deeply Husserl's phenomenology and the mechanisms of formation of the subjective world on the basis of in-depth research in the sphere of the subjective world itself, in the space of phenomena. On the other hand, it is necessary to move forward in the field of research of the brain itself, in particular, within the framework of the theory of cognitome and existome.
BERKELEY AND COGNIT. The term "cognitome" was proposed by Konstantin Anokhin to denote the totality of the cognitome abilities of the brain. In the concept of cognitome, the problem of the brain is considered as an interdisciplinary one. The brain is considered as a network structure with a cognitome hypernetwork function.
There was such a philosopher Berkeley in the history of philosophy. He argued that we see the world based on the fact that we have different images and ideas.
Jung also spoke about unconscious and subconscious collective images, putting forward the theory of archetypes.
Cognition is the first of the intermediate structures of the brain that is connected to a hypernet, and in essence, this is a hypernet. The theory of cognition is a kind of construction that is based on the analysis of the study of the structure, dynamics and activity of the real hierarchy of neural networks of the brain. This is made possible by mathematizing these processes, programming, and studying how these processes build mental contents.
COGNITION AND PHENOMENOLOGY. How close did the theory of cognition come to Husserl's phenomenology, as to a kind of world with its own self-sufficient casuistry? The world of phenomena, which is self-sufficient and develops on its own and does not depend much on what is outside of it, outside the psyche, outside of phenomena.
Moreover, no matter what phenomena arise in the human brain, they are always rooted in the environment in which the brain is immersed, which perceives the environment. We are rooted in Being that takes place outside of our brain. Nevertheless, when phenomena are formed, the genesis process takes place. Does all this have to do with cognition?
THERE ARE FEW MODELS OF THE EMERGING SUBJECTIVE WORLD. Many conceptual cognitome positions used in explaining the generation of the subjective world and its content, in particular, are borrowed from the phenomenon of cinema, from human inventions. We often use the concept of "screen", "mirror", etc. These reviews are formal and nature-centered. In fact, it is possible that processes are taking place in the brain that creates the subjective world, the mechanisms of which are far from what we borrow from nature.
Thus, it is necessary to explore the bridge between the subjective world and the brain. It is necessary to investigate such mechanisms that do not exist in nature and outside the brain. At the same time, we continue to abuse the natural science guidelines that we have developed in relation to nature. We abuse them by spreading them to the brain. Therefore, we are at a dead end, which does not allow us to cross the bridge between the subjective world and the brain.
DIFFERENT MODELS OF THE SUBJECTIVE WORLD. How does the emerging subjective reality arise? How does the dynamics of the inner world and subjective feelings arise?
There are various models.
The first model of the subjective world is based on the mechanism of reflection and self-reflection.
The second model is based on the mechanisms of the cinema phenomenon.
The third model is based on the mechanisms and phenomenon of holography. The holographic mechanism arises during the interaction of rays. A ray is not necessarily a light beam or an electromagnetic wave. A ray is something that arises from the interaction of certain flows, substances, fields, etc. These flows interact and intersect. As a result, a certain spatial structure is formed.
In addition, there are models that work on the basis of automatic network systems that take place in nature. In particular, this is the neuro-network structure of the brain. In nature, there are network models of interaction between populations of living beings. For example, an anthill or our humanity (humanoid) have complex intercommunications. Humanity has the Internet. When people interact with each other, they also have their own network interaction structures. These interactions have a network structure somewhat similar to the neural network structure of the brain.
Thus, intelligence can arise in the context of some kind of network structure. We must consider various models that can generate a certain qualitative leap in themselves. The system develops and becomes more complicated, but at a certain stage of its development, a certain mind arises. It can be at different levels. The highest mind is the one that takes place within the framework of the subjective world and human sensations.
At the same time, science, including the science of the brain, which a person develops, is limited to the person himself. This is a humanized science, as a person sees and explores nature and the brain within the framework of his anthropomorphic projection.
TRAFFIC RESEARCH IN NEURAL NETWORKS AND HYPER NETWORKS IS NOT YET A STUDY OF THE KEY MECHANISMS OF THE MIND. A cognitome is a group of cognitome neurons and a collection of groups of cognitome neurons. These are neurons that are responsible for cognitome abilities, memory, behavior, and learning ability. These neurons can be studied using modern experimental methods.
So far, we are investigating only certain material structures of the brain, as well as the traffic of information and energy flowing in these structures. All this is still something far from describing the mechanisms of generating subjective reality and phenomena of consciousness.
CONNECT AND COGNIT. A connectome is a collection of interactions between different neurons. For example, the connectome of the protozoan nematode worm, which has only about 340 neurons, has been well studied. Scientists have identified all the variants of the interaction of neurons of this worm.
Cognition is only a part of the connectome, which is associated with the processes of cognition and memory. Cognition is defined as a set of groups of neurons that interact with each other and are responsible for certain abilities of a living being. Researchers are studying these active groups of neurons involved in cognitome processes. But how uniquely these neurons are connected to cognitome processes is one of the most difficult problems.
Perhaps cognitome processes are associated with completely different structures that are not located in the cerebral cortex.
It is possible that the cognitome process is not connected with local zones because various structures participate in the cognitome process, the activity of which has simply not yet been detected. Maybe they participate, manifesting themselves in a different format that researchers are not yet able to record with the help of instruments.
NANOSTRUCTURED NETWORKS – NANOPSYCHOLOGY. The connectome is mainly formed through experimental observation of the activity of groups of neurons, including groups of cognitome neurons.
New methods are being discovered, in particular, I have put forward the hypothetical science of nanopsychology. Within the framework of this approach, it is necessary to investigate the correlation between the molecular processes of various nanostructures under the influence of the external field and how it affects mental processes. We monitor the correlation or connection between mental processes and their corresponding molecular processes and transformations. This can be achieved through the introduction of artificial nanostructures that are controlled from the outside using the influence of a field, and all this is observed in real time, and not with some kind of delay.
The nanopsychological approach will also form the structure of the connectome or cognitome, but it will be formed on the basis of a different experimental method. This structure, apparently, will differ from the one obtained through optogenetics, that is, the observation of "labeled" neurons in a stream of light.
GENOME AND COGNITION: THE PROBLEM OF ANALOGY. The idea that there is a kind of information bank in the brain, on the basis of which our consciousness and thinking work, as well as internal mental content, is no longer new. Carl Gustav Jung spoke about collective unconscious structures (archetypes), which are embedded in the human brain as some kind of makings. Under certain conditions, these inclinations and mental innate formations manifest themselves.
Cognition, in essence, is the same campaign in search of a bank of information. But why is there reason to believe that cognition is possible?
In fact, this has always been talked about in the history of science, if only because it has long been proven that a significant part of the genes involved in the production of proteins works in the brain. That is, if we take the human genome, then mostly a significant part of the genes is devoted to the expression of genes that create proteins for the brain.
DNA is mainly related to the work of our nervous system and brain. Our huge amount of biological information, which is stored in the genetic system - in the genome, is connected precisely with the brain. DNA works for the brain, contains information mainly for the brain, and everything else in the genes takes place for parts of our body.
Logically, the following analogy can be traced. Since human DNA carries an information load associated only with the brain, then why don't we look for the same genome analogue only at a higher information level?
Therefore, a cognitome appeared behind the genome. That is, there is not only a genetic system - the genome, but on its basis and other structures there is a cognitome system - the cognitome. Why wouldn't our mind and the subjective world be built on the analogy of the genome?
WHY DOES THE EXISTOM, AND NOT THE COGNITOME, GENERATE SUBJECTIVE REALITY? Or maybe, after all, we're talking about language, not cognition.
Research shows that there are individual cognitome neurons in a rabbit that respond to the right pedal. These are linkers - individual information neurons that receive complex information (color, subjective image, etc.). In the end, a hypernet of linkers generates the highest stage of the cognitome process - generalization and abstraction.
Linkers are intermediaries between kogas. Then the linkers turn into kogas and these new kogas have their own new higher linkers with the previous ones.
Is language generated by cognition? Or does cognition generate language? Language as a culture develops outside the brain on various external media. There is a speech. It sounds outside the brain to the subjects.
Language develops the brain through interiorization and exariorization.
A hypernet is not neurons, it is a collection of cognitome processes, functions, abilities, and subjective experience. In fact, it is an information hypernet. But the carrier of these processes are supposedly only neurons. But are they just neurons? It must be remembered that the genes of neurons are located outside of neurons. They are present outside the neuron, in the brain, in the body.
At best, a hypernet can only give birth to cognitome process - thinking, but subjective reality is not only cognitome processes and thinking, it is something broad - mental. There are other components of mental processes that fill our subjective reality with mental content. The mental space of conscious and unconscious processes of sensation, perception, and values, which are the basis of our subjective reality, are not always the result of cognitome processes alone. It is something more that binds us to life in a life-affirming way. Subjective reality is not only cognitome processes.
There are unconscious cognitome processes as brain activity in which our awareness does not participate. But it is these processes, taking place without our participation, that give rise to the process by which we discover ourselves and begin to know about our existence.
That is, first there is a self-cognizing substance - the brain, and it evolves in its cognition so much that it enters a new stage of cognition, leading to the discovery of the processes of consciousness in itself, and later, awareness. Thus, an observer is born - our Self, capable of evaluating what is outside of it, that is, evaluating not only the external world, but also the inner world, in particular, the very process of cognition.
Is our Self really just a product of unconscious cognitome processes? This is hardly the case! Mental processes are not only cognitome and cognitome processes. It's more than that! Emotionogenic processes also evolve in the brain, but they are often ignored when developing theories of the emergence of consciousness and awareness.
Emotionogenic processes are qualitatively different processes than cognitome and cognitome processes, but they are also the basis for the formation of our mental world or subjective reality. But, alas, in the theory of cognition, emotionogenic processes are not represented. Most likely, there are not only specific cognitome, but also emotionogenic specific neurons that are the basis for the formation of emotional intelligence in the brain.
That is why we have developed the theory of the existome, which includes semantic brain structures - existences containing emotionogenic brain structures and formations. The theory of the existome incorporates not only cognition, but also emotion. According to the concept of existom, existom brain formations have not only a cognitome component, but also an emotionogenic one.
It must be remembered that our subjective reality and our mental world are primarily the result of emotionogenic processes, and only then cognitome processes. Attachment to the life of all living things is associated with positive and life-affirming emotionality. In particular, it is the basis for the formation of a life-affirming subjective reality in us.
EXISTOM. A hypernet is not neurons, it is a collection of cognitome processes, functions, abilities, and subjective experience. In fact, it is an information hypernet. But the carrier of these processes are supposedly only neurons. But are they just neurons? It must be remembered that the genes of neurons are located outside of neurons. They are present outside the neuron, in the brain, in the body.
At best, a hypernet can only give birth to cognitome process - thinking, but subjective reality is not only cognitome processes and thinking, it is something broad - mental. There are other components of mental processes that fill our subjective reality with mental content. The mental space of conscious and unconscious processes of sensation, perception, and values, which are the basis of our subjective reality, are not always the result of cognitome processes alone. It is something more that binds us to life in a life-affirming way. Subjective reality is not only cognitome processes.
There are unconscious cognitome processes as brain activity in which our awareness does not participate. But it is these processes, taking place without our participation, that give rise to the process by which we discover ourselves and begin to know about our existence.
That is, first there is a self-cognizing substance - the brain, and it evolves in its cognition so much that it enters a new stage of cognition, leading to the discovery of the processes of consciousness in itself, and later, awareness. Thus, an observer is born - our Self, capable of evaluating what is outside of it, that is, evaluating not only the external world, but also the inner world, in particular, the very process of cognition.
Is our Self really just a product of unconscious cognitome processes? This is hardly the case! Mental processes are not only cognitome and cognitome processes. It's more than that! Emotionogenic processes also evolve in the brain, but they are often ignored when developing theories of the emergence of consciousness and awareness.
Emotionogenic processes are qualitatively different processes than cognitome and cognitome processes, but they are also the basis for the formation of our mental world or subjective reality. But, alas, in the theory of cognition, emotionogenic processes are not represented. Most likely, there are not only specific cognitome, but also emotionogenic specific neurons that are the basis for the formation of emotional intelligence in the brain.
That is why we have developed the theory of the existome, which includes semantic brain structures - existences containing emotionogenic brain structures and formations. The theory of the existome incorporates not only cognition, but also emotion. According to the concept of existom, existom brain formations have not only a cognitome component, but also an emotionogenic one.
It must be remembered that our subjective reality and our mental world are primarily the result of emotionogenic processes, and only then cognitome processes. Attachment to the life of all living things is associated with positive and life-affirming emotionality. In particular, it is the basis for the formation of a life-affirming subjective reality in us.
The research I have done has shown [2, 3, 4, 8], that the result of cognitome experience in the end is always the formation of some kind of final convolution of experience into the form of some kind of brain structure, the correlate of which in the space of the subjective world is meaning, as a component of the semantic structure of a person. It is not cognitome experience as such that is fixed due to the plasticity of the brain, but only such an experience that has matured to the ability to convolve in the form of a key meaning - an existom, which subsequently becomes one of the components of the existome, as a set of various existences. It is not cognitome experience that manifests itself in the connectome of the brain, but existences. Not every cognitome experience becomes the content of an existom, but only one that matures to the level of an existom, that is, to the ability to convolve.
It is thanks to the key meanings that there are corresponding key codes and information that can fundamentally change mental processes, cause transformations of the psyche. [3,8 ]. In essence, an existent is a set of key existents, on the basis of which the phenomenon of the essence of a person and personality takes place.
It is thanks to the hypernetwork structure of the existome that the emergence of neoplasms in the human mental content becomes possible, since the existome contains existom operators of variability. Thanks to the existom operators of variability, the psychic world is changing in a changing world. The study of the mechanisms of activity of the existom operators of variability will make it possible in the future to predict the transformation of mental content, that is, the contents of the subjective human world. All these possibilities were missing from the concept of cognitome.
The connectome, as a kind of surface registration of the activity system of groups of neurons and functional systems of neurons, requires separate mathematical processing in order to isolate and filter structures from the connectome that are the basis for the formation of an existence.
The mechanisms of memory plasticity processes caused by the self-assembly of conformational structures of brain proteins and more complex molecular machines of the brain once again confirm the molecular nature of the processes of convolution of cognitome experience to the existom level. We have shown that it is much more productive to consider cognitome processes of the brain at the level of networks of molecular machines and molecular systems, rather than at the level of neural networks. It is best to develop this direction thanks to the nanopsychological approach developed by us within the framework of a new direction justified by us - nanopsychology, as a science studying correlations between controlled molecular processes of the brain and mental processes in the "here and now" mode [ 5,6,7 ]. This becomes possible due to the introduction of externally controlled artificial nanoparticles into the brain [5,6,7 ].The introduction of controlled nanoparticles into the brain in order to activate specialized neurons or specialized groups of neurons responsible for holistic perception or mental mental processes in it may become promising for restoring lost mental functions [6]. Therefore, nanopsychology, as a new science, has many prospects
For a reason, E. Husserl argued that there is a gap of meaning between reality and consciousness. And the gap between the structures of the brain and the subjective world of man is also a gap of meaning. And these meanings need to be deeply explored both at the level of the brain, that is, at the level of existences, and at the level of the subjective human world. As a result, this bridge between the brain and the subjective world of man will be built on the basis of intermediate matter as a result of the synthesis of existences of the brain and semantic structures of the subjective world of man.
It is the existom with its specialized hypernetwork and unique system of neurons, as well as the functional system of neurons, that is the neurobiological and molecular machine basis for the phenomenon of secondary reflection of primary reflected information - the phenomenon of reflection, thanks to which conscious beings arise, having their subjective and semantic relation not only to the world, but also to themselves [ 11,12 ].And this is no less relevant compared to the knowledge of our unique genome. In essence, I have created an existom hypernetwork molecular machine model of the emergence of a person's semantic attitude not only to what is outside of him, but also to himself. On the one hand, the study of existences will come infinitely close to our meanings, and on the other hand, our meanings will come close to existences. And at the point of singularity, they will converge. This will be the bridge between our subjective world and the brain.
Our Self is our unique existence!
Bibliography:
1. Anokhin K.V. Cognition : algorithmic theory of higher brain functions,
Collection of abstracts of the XXIV Congress of the I. P. Pavlov Physiological Society. St. Petersburg, 2023. p. 7.
2. Garifullin R.R. Illusionism of personality as a new philosophical and psychological concept (monograph) Yoshkar-Ola: Mari polygraph. published. combine, 1997. - 400s.
3. Garifullin R.R. Encoding personality from alcohol and drug addiction. Manipulations in psychotherapy (monograph). Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 2004. 256 p.
4. Garifullin R.R. Psychocorrection of semantic structures of a drug-addicted personality. Abstract of the dissertation, Kazan, 2000, - 26 p.
5. Garifullin R.R. Nanopsychology as a new science. Nanophilosophy as a new worldview. // Man in the face of a global challenge/ Philosophical Society of Tatarstan.- Kazan, 2006. - pp. 101-106.
6. Garifullin R.R. Nanopsychology as a new foundation of cognitome science //Actual problems of modern cognitome sciences: Materials of the seventh All-Russian scientific and practical conference with international participation.- Ivanovo, 2014. - pp. 23-24.
7. Garifullin R.R. Nanopsychology as a new science. Nanophilosophy as a new worldview//
8. Garifullin R.R. Fundamentals of postmodern psychology.- Kazan: IPK "Brig", 2015. 196 p.
9. Garifullin R.R. Nanopsychology as a new science // Natural Phenomena and human ecology: Proceedings and materials of the Fifth International Symposium.- 2008, pp.134-140.
10 .Garifullin R.R.(2018) Postmodern psychology of personality. Revista de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales, Opcion, Ano 34, Especial №14. 380-393
11. Garifullin R.R. Me and proto-Me. Philosophical and psychological foundations of reflection. Monograph — Kazan, 2019:
12. Garifullin R.R. I and proto-I. Philosophical and psychological foundations of reflection. Monograph. — Kazan: IPK "Brig", 2019.:
Ramil Garifullin is an associate professor at KFU, Candidate of Psychological Sciences, author and founder of the theory of existom and nanopsychology.
