DrmDoc

Psychiatry is a medical discipline that focus on the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness and it's as much a science as those medical disciplines that focus on the diagnosis and treatment of physical illness and injury. Indeed, pseudoscience is as much a encumbrance to diagnosing and treating mental illness as it is to the evaluation and treatment of physical illness and injury (e.g., bogus cures). However, mental health related disciplines are likely perceived as pseudoscience more because of the perceived intangible quality of the mind relative to the body. One can't physically examine and sample test the mind as one might the body; therefore, our conclusions regarding mental illness are largely based on conjectures derived from behavioral observations and responses to medication. Science requires tangible and testable examples, which can and does apply to the mind through neuroscience and our understanding of brain function. Psychiatry and psychology become science when their modes of investigation and conclusions are based on valid neuroscience and the effects of observable and tangible brain disorders.

Why are you a supporter of Mr. Trump and how does his approach to governance, given his cabinet choices, specifically reflect or support your interests? Do you sincerely believe that a president-elect should be skipping any intelligence briefings before being sworn to office? It's my understanding that even Obama took every briefing offered before taking his oath of office. Why isn't Donald's refusal an issue with you? Do you think a person who set-up and managed a shell corporation for Russian should be our Secretary of State? Do you honestly believe as Mr. Trump that the Russians did not interfere in our elections? I'm most interested in your answer to the initial questions of whether you believe the president-elect truly represents you.

You didn't vote for Trump to follow in the footsteps of Mr. Obama...or did you?

If I recall correctly, you were among the throng calling for Hillary's prosecution for criminal violations. Despite your call and misperception, an extensive investigate found no criminal violations of government rules nor violations that harm the security of our nation. I agree that any violation of government rules should have consequences; however, as I understand, the penalties for violating government rules only apply to individuals who are actually in the employ of the government. As a candidate or ex-Secretary of State, Ms. Clinton was not subject to those penalties. Let us both ponder: ​Donald Trump no longer takes daily intelligence briefings. Donald Trump disputes the findings of extensive CIA investigations. Donald Trump's Secretary of State choice has close ties to Russia. Donald Trump selects climate change denier to head EPA. And here is where you may find a host of other wolves whom Mr. Trump have chosen to guard the sheep. By sheep I mean you Trump supporters who believe he truly cares about you, the middle class, common folk, or any people or entity other than himself, corporate America, and big business. Yes...your candidate, not mine.

There are 26 bi-weekly pay periods per calendar year (12 months), which calculates as $2,000/bi-weekly (@$1,000/week) and totals $52,000/year. However, if you are actually receiving pay semi-monthly, ​in which there are only 24 pay periods per calendar year, your salary is actually $48,000/year. Recipients of semi-monthly pay experience just two pay periods per month regardless of the number of weeks or days per month. However, bi-weekly pay recipients receive pay every two weeks regardless of pay periods that overlay or encompass separate months or years . I hope this helps.

Indeed, I recall wondering why it was ever a question.

In a prior discussion on the theory of everything, Genecks questioned whether or not consciousness is reducible. Although Genecks resolved it was not, it was a fascinating question that garnered few responses, which I though we might engage further here. If I understand correctly, Genecks views existence as a manifestation of consciousness and posits the non-existence of gravity without consciousness as an example. Rather than in the Theoretical Physics Forum where this discussion originated, I believe a thread here in neuroscience might yield more substantive discussion of this question. As the only testable example of a true consciousness producing structure, the human brain and it functional matrix definitively suggest that consciousness is, at the very least, reducible to constituent components. If this is your interest, I welcome your thoughts.

I disagree. I think it's our interpretations that are sometimes wrong and not the science itself when the methods we use to investigate a question or idea adheres to the rigors of the scientific method. In science, rigorous methods of observation, logic, and verification assures our reliance on tangible evidence and relevant facts rather than unproven or unprovable beliefs that promote delusion, ignorance and, often, social division.

You may find what you're looking for through this link to brain mapping news posted to this science discussion site. That post also contains further links to an article and paper on recent discoveries associated with this subject. I hope this helps.

I agree with Fuzzwood, this article appears to reference essentially a physical response or reaction to a perceptual experience that originates from visual stimuli. Empirically, visual stimuli enters the brain via the optic nerve through a direct neural connection that does not include the heart. The heart does not directly or indirectly receive visual sensory; therefore, the "visceral feedback" or heartrate response to visual stimuli can only originate from brain function. Increases and decreases in heartrate responses to visual stimuli are indicative of what is happening in the brain rather than some thought or perceptual process of the heart. However, "visceral feedback" may also have another source that actually involves the viscera. It's called the enteric nervous system and is sometimes called the "second brain" as this more recent "Do Gut Feelings Actually Exist?" DNews video also discusses.

I'll help you with these two but I won't give you the answers, you'll have to work them out for yourself. The first problem is essentially asking how many units sold for SR15 apiece will equal the cost of SR3000? Your solution involves division. Your second problem involve multiplication, subtraction, and finally division. To get the breakeven cost per month you will have to multiply the number of rooms booked by the SR received for each booking. This will give you the total breakeven cost, which includes fixed cost. Next, you will have to subtract the fixed cost provided (SR6000) from the total breakeven cost and then divide your answer by the original number of rooms booked to get the variable cost per room. These all appear to be fairly simple problems to solve on you own with very little effort. Good Luck!

In my reductionist opinion, all mental illnesses are aberrations of our brain's functional matrix which, as I previously conveyed, essentially consists of a series of efferent responses (output) to afferent sensory (input). Mental illness is an aberrant output of our brain's functional matrix and hypnosis appears to induce functional aberrance; therefore, hypnotizability should be consistent with susceptibility or sensitivity to some functional aberrance. The perceived attentional deficits of the depressed brain may only be a deficit as it relates to the specific measures applied to attention assessment in mental illness. It could be that depression is a state of brain function where sufferers are attentive and focused in ways inconsistent with standard testing and measures relative to mental illness. Our brain responses are produced through a series of cortical and subcortical relays where most tests and studies appear to focus on cortical areas rather than subcortical. This is an important distinction to me because it is equivalent to focusing on the brain's efferent response systems without adequate consideration of that system's afferent or input delivery matrix. It's important because of the dependency of our brain's responses on afferent stimuli, which only emerges from subcortical relays.

Well said!

Big pri*ks have to start somewhere don't they? I'm confident of several who haven't evolved much since knowing them way back when in my youth. Left on their own, children can be cruel little...

Since his election, I've tried to avoid all media reports and thoughts on the prospect of Trump's presidency. The idea is just too depressing and a very disappointing reflection of our electorate's intelligence. In the past, I've commented against the idea of an Electoral College but it seems a necessity evil given the nature of democracy as this assessment of Socrates perspective on democracy attests. As I understand and this video link explores, Socrates hated democracy.

It's definitely a mature read laced with adult themes that may not be clear to the 13 year old pubescent mind without adult guidance. They'd probably find Animal Farm more interesting.

Perhaps it's the science of attraction rather than love that you are referencing? I think the science of love or bonding as it relates to brain chemistry is very well understood. The behavioral qualities you described appear to relate to attraction which, IMO, is highly cultural and subjective but has received plenty of scientific attention. In retrospect, love was more of a costly annoyance and inconvenience than a scientific conundrum for me. From my comments, you can probably guest how well I likely faired in marriage.

I remember his Animal Farm referenced in high school as a fable on the fallacy of Communism. Now it portents to me the rise of the Trump regime and the Republicans, where pigs profess to support and represent the workers class only to greedily exploit and consume them.

No not long at all, just a requirement of certain courses in both high school and college many, many years ago.

This is another interesting perspective because it appears to support our focus on the thalamus, which I speculated about earlier. Although visual sensory is ultimately received and processed in the occipital lobe, it must initially traverse the lateral geniculate nucleus of the thalamus. Excluding olfaction, all sensory input initially passes through the thalamus before reaching hierarchal areas of the cortex. In hypnosis, visual fixation coupled with verbal suggestions appear to alter thalamic function where only verbal suggestions are received and processed by hierarchal areas as reality. This dated Nature Review article on an fMRI study of hypnotic and physical pain appears to support a conclusion that verbal suggestions under hypnosis are perceived and processed by the cortex as reality when subjects were given the suggestion that a mild stimulus would produce pain. Unfortunately, this study doesn't reveal how or whether the thalamus filters sensory input under hypnosis; however, cortical activation only occurs in the presence of subcortical relays. Therefore, cortical activations that produce pain may only result from subcortical connections relaying that sensory information, which again directs attention back to the thalamus. Our thalamus is the primary source and recipient of neural relays to and from the cortex.

For you bibliophiles familiar with the works of one of the greatest literary figures of the 20th century, I found this very illuminating The School of Life video on the life and time of George Orwell. The video discusses the seminal quality of Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984, which contain several prescient parallels to our society and current political environment. I recall his works being required reading from high school thru college.

Your hypothesis of the DID memory construct and activation is fascinating. It appears to conform to what the neuroscience suggests to me about the nature of sensory perception and its activation of the network of memories we use to navigate reality or perceptual experience. Essentially, our brain is a simple machine whose functional matrix could be described as a series of inputs and outputs. Afferent or sensory input initiates efferent responses in the brain that can produce both internal and external behaviors as output. With DID and PTSD, trigger suggests those sensory inputs related to those memory and behavioral aberrations patients engage as output. Hypnosis appears to produce a focused state where efferent brain responses and behavioral outputs conform to verbal inputs without consideration of an incongruent perceptual reality. Hypnosis creates a brain state where verbal commands are perceived as reality to the exclusion of all other perceptions. This suggests that the hypnotized brain inhibits responses to tactile, visual, oral, and other varied sensory input with aural input as the only exception. For me, this offers a fascinating neurological study of how the brain is able to render all sensory input subordinate to that perceived aurally.

Although the ANS primarily comprises motor neurons, the enteric plexuses of the ANS contains primary sensory neurons that connect to other neural networks. The following quote can be found in this Scholarpedia link: This article also contains a more detailed discussion of afferent (sensory) inputs to autonomic pathways. I hope this helps.

Yes, very interesting indeed. I try to learn something new every day. I hear it keeps you young...although my mirror vigorously disagrees.

Not sure if this is the right place for this post. Just learned that some supernova stellar remnants may exist as quarks. According to this illuminating PBS Space Time video, the collapse of massive stars into neutron remnants may further collapse into quarks, Strange quarks particularly are described. According to the video's host, a square centimeter of neutronium weighs about a billion tons and conditions at the core of certain collapsed quark stars might even resemble the condition of the universe before the Big Bang. The video also suggests that nova remnant 1987A may be evidence of a quark star.