Fabergé egg of the mind

Greetings

In this talk, we will discuss the facial recognition centers in the brain and claim that they are the core or the anchor for creating an internalized character, and we will also present studies that discuss the social brain map of the individual that reflects a social hierarchy, which has possible consequences regarding the hierarchy of internalized characters, and we will say a few words about the leadership of a group and its representation in the brain.

The face recognition centers in the brain.

Face processing researchers often claim that humans spend more time looking at human faces than at any other category of complex visual stimuli. As a result of this unparalleled exposure, adults appear to have an extraordinary level of ability in the area of ​​facial processing. It is this proficiency that is at the center of a debate: Does facial processing have a unique status in the brain?

Read more: The face recognition center in the brain as a nucleus for creating an internalized character, the social hierarchy, the social brain map and the place of the group leader in the brain

Greetings

Let’s recall that we assumed that the core nucleus for the creation of internalized characters in humans are the areas that specialized in face recognition and especially the fusiform nucleus area.

This time we will ask what happens in a variety of animals from humans through other primates and vertebrates?

Do they also have internalized figures of their own species and perhaps of significant others [eg human faces in domesticated animals]?

In order to deal with this difficult question, we will try to go through studies that clarified the core of our hypothesis for the creation of internalized figures [if primary and diffuse and if complex] and that is the ability in higher animals to recognize their faces

We will raise the question of whether there are illustrations that reflect the processing of the most important facial data for an individual whether it is a person or an animal, those that the individual is more exposed to. Are these illustrations in which the processing is done in a better quality and maybe faster and with a higher resolution? Are these similar or different between humans and other primates and between humans and other vertebrates?

The upper group is the primate group

Read more: The evolution of the internalized characters

Greetings,

In this conversation we will first discuss the development of language in the young child, then we will briefly outline the stages of cognitive development in children according to the psychologist Piaget and the development of the theory of mind [THEORY OF MIND] and in this context we will mention the contribution of Baron-Cohen. In the following we will present two articles related to the development of language, one by Brooke Ferguson and Sandra Waxman from 2017 about the link between language and categorization in infancy, while the other is by Kerr Razori and her friends from the same year [2017] about the development of language to describe the mental state of the baby: the longitudinal roles of attachment and maternal language. It should be noted that there is not always unanimity regarding the dates of the different stages of development between the different approaches.

After laying out these datasets and views, we will try to briefly develop the issue of the influence of language development on the creation of internalized characters.

Read more: Thoughts about the influence of language development on the creation of internalized characters

Greetings

In a previous conversation we hypothesized that a face serves as an anchor or as a nucleus for the formation of an internalized character. Unfortunately, this has not been scientifically tested yet. However, this time we will open with the review by Eleanor McKone and her colleagues from 2012, which demonstrates that the data no longer support the theory in which the face representation at birth is a sort of innate schema only, while good face diagnosis at the individual level requires many years of practice to achieve. Instead, it now appears that infants are born with a developed ability to represent the structure of upright faces [that are not inverted], which supports the individuation of faces, and the ability to process holistically, and not just though directing attention to faces.

Read more: How a caregiver becomes a significant internalized character for a baby in the first year of its life, before the language acquisition

Dear readers:

We know that excessive stress can lead to averse changes in our well-being and sometimes even to outburst of a psychiatric disorder. In 1967, psychiatrists Thomas Holmes and Richard Rahe examined over 5000 patient’s medical records to determine whether stressful events cause illnesses. Their premise was that stressors can be ranked by the degree of change or upheaval they typically cause in individuals’ lives. The scale lists common stressful events and arbitrarily assigns a value of 50 ‘LCUs’ [units] to the stress caused by marriage. Patients ranked a list of 43 life events based on a relative score.  The Holmes and Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS) uses the correlational research method to identify the connection between stress and health. Some authors criticized the Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale for not taking into account that different cultural groups react differently to different life events. Also, the scale doesn’t consider intraindividual divergence.

In our own experience we ran into a patient from whom we learned that taking into account interindividual divergence is absolutely crucial in order to predict patient’s reaction to the stressors or, as we mostly name it,”triggers”.

Read more: Sensitivity Channels and Trigger Event Analysis

Greetings

We will once again remind those who join the blog that in the model we propose for the “self”, one must first distinguish between the “primary self”, which is actually the basic biological core consisting of a number of innate structures as shown in figure number 1 and which is subject to development during life and the “secondary”, or social self, which is a structure that develops during a person’s exposure to social influence, and consists of internalizations of figures (or characters) significant to the person, originating either from external groups or from the imaginary groups related, for example, to a character from a story, from a myth, from a movie, etc. that had a considerable influence on the person. We note here that at birth [see Figure 1] there are innate patterns for most parts of the self such as for example the “social self” and its parts that form nuclei for a possible future development of these structures.

The physical self is defined as the set of experiences related to the perception of the body, its limits and sensations, and also includes thoughts, attitudes and feelings towards the body, and which begins with the innate physical self which, as mentioned, continues to develop in human life.

The “secondary selves” include 1] the variety of representations of the “I” that originate from attitudes and feelings towards the self and its representations in different periods of life 2] the representations of internalized characters that often originate from significant characters that the person is exposed to during his life but as mentioned there may also be imaginary characters represented in books, movies, etc. that had a considerable influence on man.

3] representations of the “subculture” [subculture refers to social influences in the milieu [environment] in which the person lives and are not necessarily related to a specific person].

And finally we will mention the “reflective self” or the “reflective me”, which is defined as a structure that develops following the development of the social self and enables a comprehensive view of the individual’s state of awareness and mental expressions.

These internal figures, most of which are internalizations of influential figures in external reality, are shaped during the life, and sometimes following a crisis or trauma or events related to that figure [or alternatively during a significant development such as creating a new meaning for life and re-evaluating positions ans attitudes], there may even be several versions of that figure in a course of life.

Read more: A proposal for the stages of internalizing the human characters and the possible context for autism

Hi,

We have already written that “because man is a world in its entirety” – there is nothing like this sentence to emphasize the connection between the environment in which man lives and his inner world. From the moment a person is born until his death, he is subject to environmental influence. Like a sponge, he absorbs the characters of the significant people in his life. These characters can be called “reference group or groups”. These actually shape us, our attitudes, our emotional world and ultimately – our behavior as well. These groups may influence us directly, with the greater social influence the more important the influencing group seems to be, and in a more complex way that cannot be immediately identified. The important reference groups undergo a process of internalization and become an inseparable part of the person and operate within him even when the original groups no longer exist. Some of these effects exist without permeating the person’s consciousness, turning him in a certain sense into a kind of a “robot” that performs a job not his own, according to the “software program” determined by other people who have now become his internalized characters and become part of his inner world. The many conflicts that occur between these internal characters, between them and their own selves and between the contemporary reference groups in the person’s external reality may cause a person to go from mental crises to the level of actual mental disorders. We note that most mental disorders begin or worsen following stressful situations. It turned out that a significant part of these situations occurs against the background of the external [in the outside world] and internalized social groups to which the person belongs.

In the model we propose for the “self”, one must first differentiate between the primary self, which is actually the basic biological nucleus consisting of a number of innate structures as shown in figure number 1 and which is subject to development during life. and the [secondary] social self, which is a structure that develops during a person’s exposure to social influence, and consists of internalizations of figures significant to the person, originating either from external groups or from imaginary groups related, for example, to a character from a story, from a myth, from a movie, etc. that had a considerable influence on the person). We note here that at birth [see Figure 1] there are innate patterns for most parts of the self such as for example the “social self” and its parts that form nuclei for a possible future development of these structures.

Read more: Understanding the relationship “I and Thou” according to Buber within the framework of the theory of internalized characters

Greetings

Let’s first recall that in the model we proposed for the “self” in the 2nd and 13th conversations in the blog, we emphasized that we must first differentiate between the “primary self”, which is actually the basic biological nucleus consisting of several innate structures and which is subject to development during life. and the “social self”, which is a structure that develops during a person’s exposure to social influence, and consists of internalizations of figures significant to the person [included in the “secondary self”], originating either from external groups or from imaginary groups related, for example, to a character from a story, from a myth, from a movie, etc. that were having a considerable effect on the person.

The “secondary selves” contained within the framework of the social self include: 1] the variety of representations of the “I” that originate from attitudes and feelings towards the self and its representations in different periods of life 2] the representations of internalized characters that often originate from significant characters that the person is exposed to during his life but as mentioned there may also be imaginary characters which are represented in books, films, etc. that had a considerable influence on man. 3] representations of the “subculture” [subculture refers to social influences in the milieu [environment] in which the person lives and are not necessarily related to a specific person]. A variety of representations of these introverted characters can be described in different metaphors, one of which is a “board of characters”.

If so, we also maintain that within us, in our minds, the social “self” is represented by a “directorate” or “board” of internalized figures.

Read more: Understanding hypnosis in the context of the internalized figures

In the introduction to our blog, we wrote the following: “Because man is a world in its entirety” – there is nothing like this sentence to emphasize the connection between the environment in which man lives and his inner world. From the moment a person is born until his death, he is subject to environmental influence. Like a sponge, he absorbs the characters of the significant people in his life. These characters can be called “reference group or groups”. These actually shape us, our attitudes, our emotional world and ultimately – our behavior as well. These groups influence both directly, with greater social influence if the influencing group is seen as more significant, and in a more complex way that cannot be immediately identified. The important reference groups undergo a process of internalization and become an inseparable part of the person and operate within him even when the original groups no longer exist. Some of these effects exist without permeating the person’s consciousness, turning him in a certain sense into a kind of “a robot” that performs a job not his own, according to the “software” dictated by other people who have now become his internalized characters and become part of his inner world. This group of characters can be called in different metaphors, for example the “directorate of inner characters” the “internalized jury” and more.

In the model we proposed for the “self” in the second conversation on the blog, we emphasized that one must first differentiate between the “primary self”, which is actually the basic biological nucleus consisting of a number of innate structures and which is subject to development during life. and the “social self” , which is a structure that develops during the exposure of a person to social influence, and consists of internalizations of figures significant to the person (so called “secondary selves”), which originate either from external groups or from imaginary groups related, for example, to a character from a story, from a myth, from a movie and more which had a considerable influence on man.

The “secondary selves” contained within the framework of the social self include 1] the variety of representations of the “I” that originate from attitudes and feelings towards the self and its representations in different periods of life 2] the representations of internalized characters that often originate from significant characters that the person is exposed to during his life but, as mentioned before, there may also be imaginary characters which are represented in books, films, etc. that had a considerable influence on man. 3] Internal representations of the “subculture” [subculture refers to social influences in the milieu [environment] in which the person lives and are not necessarily related to a specific person].

The treatment itself, which is focused on the reference groups, sets as one of its important goals to bring to the person’s consciousness social influences that he is subject to and that are largely unconscious. In essence, the treatment allows the patient to better understand the representations of the significant figures internalized within him and help him achieve a better adaptation to the society in which he lives.

Considering that the model for the “social self” is based on a series of significant internalized characters, while the actor under the guidance of the director builds a character that is supposed to be reliable, we will ask in this blog how can the method focused on the reference group and dealing as mentioned with internalized characters contribute to the actors?

Greetings,

This is our 12th conversation.

As we all know, humans are social animals living in families of their own kind [and sometimes even in clans or tribes].

But even these families, be them as extended as they are, are integrated, after all, within a comprehensive and larger social matrix [for example, the country they are staying in]. Although our immediate experience suggests us that the norms of the family surrounding us often determine our attitudes and behavior, we claim that if we examine the matter in depth, it is the norms of the larger social group that often dictate our attitudes and actions and usually prevail over the attitudes and family norms.

Is it therefore true that the norms of the larger social group [whether in our time or in ancient times] generally prevail over the norms of the smaller group? If this is true, then perhaps we can declare a rule that the larger the group, the more its norms dictate the norms and attitudes of smaller groups contained within it.

Even if we accept this rule, it is not always true, especially for separatist, anarchist or avant-garde groups. However, even in these latter groups, alongside the customary attitudes and deviant norms, there are still ruling attitudes and norms of the larger group after these have been filtered by the norms of the deviant group.

We believe that this accepting the social norms of the extended group is critical to the social survival of the extended group and when it is not fulfilled, the extended society may come to disintegration.

So it seems then that there is usually a hierarchy of social groups related to size [but as mentioned this does not always apply to marginal groups], with the largest social group at the top, such as the state for example, whose norms and attitudes are usually dominant relative to those of the smaller groups contained within it. It also seems that we as social animals tend to mark who is the higher group in the hierarchy and conform to its norms even if we are not aware of it.

In other words, it seems that the hierarchical principle is extremely important. Indeed brain findings in humans show that there are brain representations for social hierarchy.

Read more: Internalizing the political dictator within the framework of the self