Early Notes on Mind Theory

These are notes, not an essay.  As such, expect wild mistakes and inconsistencies, as these are things I’m simply meditating on at the moment.  Thus, I’m also certainly not spell checking.

One way to think of the mind is a tower.  This is not the ideal way, but is simply an interesting metaphor for describing how the mind functions.  It is not to be taken to a literal extreme.  The floors represent hierarchical functions.

This model applies to all brains and minds, not just human.

This tower is a computer building with many floors.  In the basement is the machinery.  The hot water, air conditioning, plumbing, and a very massive computer.  The basement contains the body and brain.

The ROM for the basement, the brain and body, is written in a different language called DNA.  The the ROM code is locked in the DNA, and is non rewritable by any floor of the building.  It is written once at conception, and unless there is a copy malfunction, is never changed for the entire existence of the building.  The ROM code expresses itself through inputs and outputs to the brain, and allows for software add ons to be written there.

The software add ons may access any of the controls and inputs that it wishes, but generally only on a macro level, and not on a microscopic level.

This computer has many functions, up to and including running hypothetical simulations of all time and space and even things that could not exist in real time in space, such as imagining Santa Claus going elephant hunting in midtown Manhattan during an invasion by aliens that all look like Elvis.  Yes, it can simulate even quite ridiculous things.

All floors above the basement are running software which floats around doing its software business.

On the first floor of the building is the operating system layer.  The name of this operating system depends on the building.  European built buildings this year generally come with Aristoteleion AI 2K37, whereas Oriental built buildings this year generally come with Confucian AI 2K94.   This is where the basic definition of conceptual reality exists for the entire building.  Concepts like up, down, left right, the realness of objects perceived by the senses, emotional processing, and interfaces with the hardware.

The interfaces process and do basic interpretation of the input from 8 senses.  Touch, taste, smell, hearing, sight, emotion, and time lapse.  This floor runs touches all parts of the brain and all other parts of the mind must access the basement through the operating system, with no exception.

The floors above may send instructions back requesting physical actions and processing time.

The language that this operating system floor runs on is called Human IO, or HIO, and is a machine code language specially required by all buildings, regardless of the OS written on them.  All computer processors in the building come with the same basic architecture and requirements that the OS floor use the HIO machine code language.

The second floor is the language floor.  On this floor, all language software runs, giving words to the sensory input and processing words from higher floors.  Software at this level and above it process both inputs and outputs through the language floor.

This critical floor has software compatibility with general OS and specialized OS interfaces.  English 5.0 is a modern Language floor software that runs here, and has both generalized compatibility but with optimized compatibility with the Aristoteleion OS version line.  Mandarin 2.0 is a modern Language floor software that also has both generalized compatibility but with optimized compatibility with the Confucian OS version line.

Most modern languages have generalized compatibility with all modern OSes.  However, running older OSes or older Languages, while always possible, requires a special translator add-on package.  The culture translator package cannot run on the Language level, but must be run on the next floor up.  This culture translator package software is responsible for complex translations without one to one compatibilities for words, grammar rules, and other conventions.  This takes care of translating words that only exist in one language, into raw definitions with close approximations in another language.

Continual use of the cultural translator package will permanently install resulting translations permanently on the Language floor.

This translator software can also assist in running multiple Language level software packages, but is not necessary.  The translator software is only necessary when full installation is not completed. Direct installation of multiple Language level packages is allowed.

In the United States, many buildings are working on full installations of English onto existing Spanish installations.  And many buildings that already have English are adding a partial Spanish installation.

All floors from Language up operate with the Language Tag System, in which all processes are tagged as possible with Language identifiers, or Language ID.

In non-human animals, the Language floor is nearly empty, and serves very little purpose.  These animals lack.  These animals deal with more raw data as the complexity of the particular animals Language Tag System is lacking.  The lack of language should have a near logarithmic impact on the complexity available to all floors above.

On the third floor is the Knowledge software level.

Here, knowledge is kept in different forms.  Some data is passed up directly from the OS level with no language processing.  This happens when the Language level lacks the software to attach to the data.  Other data for which the Language level has software is tagged before going to the Knowledge floor.

The Knowledge level accepts data from below it as generally as External Inputs and data from above it as Internal Inputs, but it doesn’t necessarily categorize knowledge this way.  
Furthermore, the Knowledge level may attach storage points with both External and Internal.

For instance, the OS may bring in an image to the Language floor.

The Language floor requests an image match to the Language Library on the Knowledge floor.  The Language floor receives an Language ID of “wooden chair”, and this is processed and tagged.

This is sent to the Knowledge floor.  Knowledge related to the chair is sought before it is stored in a short term storage unit before being passed to the next floor.  Eventually, the wooden chair might be come back down from an upper floor with instructions.  These instructions are stored by the Knowledge floor in the same storage container, but the time allowed for the container increases each time the container is accessed or added to.

The instructions are therefore stored in raw form.  They are passed down to the Language floor, which processes any tags, and these tags are passed back up and added to the raw forms of the instructions, and then handed down all the way to HIO.  It might look like this:

An emotion is received by HIO.  This is a raw form of dull pain. This is passed up to the OS Floor.
This OS filters this raw form of dull pain, and reforms it into the OS native language.  It tags this as an internal pain, a non-threatening pain, and a steady pain.  This is passed up to the Language Floor.
The Language Floor runs an emotion memory search command of the sensation to the Knowledge Floor.
The Knowledge Floor stores the raw input and receives a pattern match with in the English language pack and sends the data back down.
The Language Floor uses the pattern match to label the pain with “Tired”, and sends it back up to Knowledge.
Knowledge stores the new tag and sends the information up to higher levels.
After a few more trips back up and down the floors, we might get a seek request to “sit” to achieve “rest”.
When the chair is seen and processed, it trips the instruction to sit.  This instruction eventually makes it way back to the HIO as instructions in maneuvering and sitting into the chair.

There is a lot of movement between floors, but each one serves a purpose and is hierarchical.  All floors at the bottom hold power over the floors above it to manipulate. And floors above must request permission from floors below it.

This is why the knowledge floor sits above the language floor even though specific vocabulary is held within the knowledge floor.

While it might make sense to someone trying to design this building to put knowledge on the first floor, knowledge is merely storage. It has a few functions:

It holds no ability to run anything other that storage and retrieval.
It issues no instructions.
It automatically stores all incoming and outgoing data.
It receives a request to access and a destination to deliver the answer to that request.
The more data is accessed, the longer it is stored.

So couldn’t the building put knowledge in the basement?  It can’t reside in the basement, because that would mean physical storage.  Data appearing in the basement as storage would be physical cells moving or forming in special areas when new data is stored.

While we certainly have physical changes when data is stored, this is a result of the process of the brain, and is true of all floors.  Memory, however, is not a special function of the brain, but of the mind.  Memory is a data vacuum existing in software that handles both short term and long term storage as a function of processing.of the OS which manipulates the brain through the HIO.

If we see long term storage as connections built through neurons in the brain, it is the HIO that is making the request, and the brain performing the connection.  The HIO may make requests for the type of change it wishes to make, but it is the biological brain which ultimately determines how to fulfill that request.  This will be explored in much more detail later, especially when we find strange memory storage anomalies due to damaged or seemingly unforeseen memory associates which were not requested by the mind.

One quick example of this would be Schizophrenia.  The memory is attempting to operate normally, but there is an issue at the hardware level.  If memory were purely hardware, we would expect to see two things:

All memory would be logically located in one specific area.  Rather, we see memories firing across the entire brain.  Sure, we know the hippocampus is involved, but it’s certainly no clear answer to a singular location.  In fact, speaking biologically, we see the operations, the software, itself being stored… This analogy, thus, is not meant to answer all questions, but to sort out the actually processing of the mind from the software abstract, not the hardware abstract.

The other fact we would see if Knowledge were to move below any function of the mind to the hardware level is that memory would biologically act photographic or random, rather than appearing mostly processed and pattern associated.  Obviously, some people have this ability.  And we might think that it is still biological, and that it is mental ACCESS that highlights a very short term photographic memory.

In other words, we could all have a photographic memory, but one that only goes back at most a few seconds.  And if not accessed immediately, it goes in the trash.

However, let’s suppose that’s true.  We still have functions of the mind controlling that access.

In my model, data storage is a software function that affects a physical brain.  Changing to a photographic short term memory still leaves data storage as a software function, because storage still requires access to go anywhere else.

The theory of very short term photographic memory simply means our hardware has ram, not just a harddrive.  So, ram or harddrive, it remains the case that:

Memory is NOT an automatic function, but is controlled by the process of the mind, not the automatic hardware of the brain.
Memory is NOT a random function, but is controlled by patterns.  If we say the mind, we explictly mean patterns.  If we say patterns of the brain, then we mean mind unless we’re talking about an automatic function, which we already dismiss.
Memory is stored in the brain, on the hardware.  This is not in doubt at all.
Memory is manipulatable both by hardware and by software.

Thus, in all this, we find exactly what we find on a computer, though the hardware and software are of different natures and precision.  On a computer, we do not put data on the hardware, that’s simply where it resides in the physical world.  It is the software that tells the hardware when to store something and when to retrieve it.  Memory on a computer is not an automatic function nor a random function.  And both hardware and software have access to manipulate the data.

The brain/computer analogy actually holds up quite literally in this area.  Though the hardware is completely different, the paradigm of hardware/software/storage holds up in a one-to-one ratio.  And it will continue holding this ratio, even if we find in the future that the brain has 3 different types of RAM and 5 different types of harddrives, and variants thereof.   And just like a computer, both data and programs are stored in similar ways.  In fact, to a computer, programs are just data as well.  In the brain, this is also true.  One difference with the computer and the brain is that in the brain, the storage and the processor seem to be the exact same devices.  It would be like a computer that is built as one very large computer chip with enough switches to also act as RAM and harddrive, rather than having separate devices.

In a way, that makes the brain more elegant.  It is at that point that the analogy falls apart.

One other point… children come with very little code… The first thing apparently worked on is the OS and language.  But few people can access early childhood memories.  This either means that memories at this state are all autonomous, likely but not probable in my view, or that memories are not forming before the language code/circuits.  It is after language, in most humans, when permanent memories form.

I’m certain a type of “RAM” is functioning, but the “harddrive” just isn’t functional yet.

But I digress… let’s get back to the analogy of the tower.

So, we put the Knowledge Floor on the third floor.  We also know that the knowledge floor is much emptier by magnitudes when the language floor is less complex.  This is true of non-human animals.

They have very basic languages, lacking most of the components of human languages.  This limits their memory storage, of which language takes up a large portion in humans.  And because minds place language so near the core OS, it is why humans are able to retell memories in great detail, because much of the language is already connected to the stored knowledge.

The testable hypothesis is this.  Take a native speaker in a language like English who formed two different but seemly equally vivid adult memories before learning another language.  They go on to learn another language fluently.  They form two more memories as equally vivid as the first two, but in a context where they are engulfed in the foreign language, say out to dinner with Chinese coworkers in Beijing.

Then, have them speak the first memory in as much detail as possible in English.  Then, have them speak the second memory in as much detail as possible in their second language.  Then, have them speak the third memory in as much detail as possible in their second language.  Then have them speak the fourth memory in as much detail as possible in English.

What we should find, if they are truly fluent and speaking their second language as they are thinking in context of their second language, is that the memory is more vivid in the language in which it was originally experienced.  The third and fourth memories are the control group

The results will tell us a few things.

If the memories are always more vivid in only one particular language, then they are more fluent in their native language and mentally store knowledge in native language compatible terms.  Because we cannot know if being fluent is the issue, this is indeterminant.  Either case might be true.  This doesn’t matter if the language they are more vivid in is native or secondary.  The fact might also be that one language is naturally more vivid or expressive.  One way to test for this is to count details, not flowering language, as a mark of vivid.  The amount of individual details, their quantitative property, not their qualitative property, is what should be measured.

However, if the memories are always more vivid in the language in which they are experienced, then we know that they are fluent in both languages equally and that memory is subservient to language as postulated here.

But, if the memories are equally vivid regardless of language, then we know that the person is fluent, and that language is subservient to memory, thus disproving my hypothesis.

Now, if the memories are always more vivid in the language in which they are NOT experienced, then we must pursue a completely different hypothesis, because that is just weird.

In my next writing, we’re going to be talking about floors four and five, behavior and worldview, respectively