If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)
Hi all, The AutoSave Draft feature is now disabled across the site. The decision to disable the feature was made via a poll last year. The delay in putting it in place was due to a bug/update issue. This should serve as a reminder to manually save your drafts if you wish to keep them. Thanks, The Boards Team.
Hello all! This is just a quick reminder to ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere.

Neurology of psychology (cognitive science)

  • 11-06-2022 3:53pm
    Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Terminology wise I'm happy to be corrected (or given perspective on how others interpret/understand references).

    First off, I'm first and foremost mathematics/engineering qualified and experienced, later diverging into health science/physical therapy.

    But core interest in neurology as a means of performance enhancement (a supposedly emerging core area of neuroscience).

    Despite having no official qualification in neurology, I'll feel confident in saying it's become the area in which I'm most experienced, interested and coming close to having the greatest competence in.

    I outline that for no other reason than perspective.


    First off I'd like to offer better neurological definition/perspective on "mood" and "performance" terms that lack true physiological characterization (again, open to constructive criticism).

    Depression: depression is a reduction in frequency/power of neural action potentials, neural spikes.


    They're electrical spikes that occur in one of the one hundred billion or so neurons in the brain that come into effect by way of positive to negative charged molecule fluctuation across the cell membrane (outside/inside said cell).

    DOWNSTREAM of this, they cause the discharge of chemicals which communicate with the next neuron across the intercellular gap (synapse; one single cell can communicate with around 10,000 other cells). Something like this:

    When these electrical spikes don't fire enough, the signals are not discharged enough, thus our mood drops.

    Externally, personality terms, behaviourally, we call this "depression".

    But NEUROLOGICALLY, on a molecular, purely biological level, low action-potential/neural-spike propagation - that's depression.


    Next point........ happiness, elevation, excitation:




  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Jump in with comments/disputes any time.

    Like I said, the purpose I'm trying to present with is offering better neurological clarification on behavioural presentations that historically are not well characterized as per their purely physiological origins


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    The first post may be insulting to some intelligence's, but I wanted to be as clear as possible to those unfamiliar with the core concept of neurology.

    So first was characterization of depression (down regulation, low activity) neurologically.


    The opposite, increased activity and up-regulation = excitation.

    So excitation is neurologically the opposite of depression, high action-potential (neural electrical spike) propagation, versus down-regulated or low.


    The point I really want to make here is psychologically, excitation is mediated in neurological excitation.

    Neurological excitation is necessary for our very functionality, which is why as humans we're obliged to consistently chase a sense of excitation, behaviorally, lifestyle terms - to keep ourselves healthy, feeling positive and functional.

    • I'm aware this is a psychology forum, not neurological or biological science specifically so I do want to keep the focus on psychology/mood and external presentations and feelings, but in perspective of its underlying biology.


    Next: emotional-expression re action-potential strength.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 8,490 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Fathom

    Interesting topic. Not my area of expertise. Encourage you to continue. Perhaps draw someone in to the discussion?

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,853 ✭✭✭ Pissy Missy

    "I'm aware this is a psychology forum, not neurological or biological science specifically so I do want to keep the focus on psychology/mood and external presentations and feelings, but in perspective of its underlying biology"

    Neurology came up when I was doing my psych degree many moons ago so I think it's relevant for you to post it in the psychology forum

  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Yeah I hadn't realized this sub was hit so hard since the Vanilla switch, not so much activity here.

    I had thought kind of comprehensively covering the entirety of the concept I'm going with then linking this thread to some Irish based neuro/psychologist based academics on twitter, get some (constructive, hopefully) criticism.

    My contention has specific focus on performance enhancement, in my case neurological thus sports performance.

    And for this I have seen UNQUESTIONABLE results, neurology essentially being the determinant of musculoskeletal activity. But alas n=1 studies are often considered "under powered".


    But in any case yeah I'll continue on, try and be as concise as possible to make it "user friendly" to casual readers and if a salaried researcher can drop some knowledge bombs/thoughts (or even questions), all the better.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    So up to now, having firmly established that our behaviour, functionality, personality, "performance", etc. is mediated through the nervous system, in much the same way as the behaviour of a computer is coded through its elaborate network of semi-conductors;

    Focusing on the externalized presentation of a person, to cumulatively characterize said functionality or "performance", I believe one of the most accurate means to do is via the term, "emotional expression".

    Ability of a person to adequate express themselves emotionally (which obviously affects human communication, contact, social ability, behavior, etc.)


    The reason this is so pertinent to performance/functionality/well-being of the nerve/neurological system, is because ability to express oneself (communicate), is at it's core mediated through the potency of nerve pulses, action potential.

    Potency of action-potentials - these:


    Expression comes not only in verbal communication, but feeling.

    When a nerve depolarizes (propagates an electrical spike), it generates an electromagnetic wave.

    These technically propagate to infinity, but decay with distance (inverse square law).

    So when people say, "I dig your vibe man", what they're referring to is the sense of electromagnetic vibration induced as a function of another organisms propagating "wave-field", which is a function of their neural-networks electrical activity.


    The overall take away point is that EMOTION and NEURAL ACTIVITY are intrinsically linked, dependent on one another.


    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Reading back over what I've outlined so far, unsure of how easy/difficult it is to understand but, if nothing else I'll get everything clarified and potentially boil it down later.


    So, excitation = increase in neural firing, signalling = improvement in CNS activity = health, well being, strength, improved memory etc.

    Depression = reduction in neural firing, signalling = weakness, onset of issues such as neural degeneration, memory loss.

    • We chase excitation to be well.

    This is the core focus.

    HOW we chase excitation, the means to the end, and in terms of OPTIMIZATION, optimal efficiency and mitigating degenerative outcomes (i.e. historically, for one to prosper, another must suffer).


    Coming back to externalized presentations being an extension of neurological integrity:

    The externalized presentations society conventionally deems imperative to functionality are, social, emotional, behavioral....... and lesser spoken/acknowledged, sexual.

    Social, emotional, behavioral, sexual.

    These are the primary externalized presentations, states of well being which if we have proficiency in, reflect truly positive neurological function.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    So ultimately what I'm conveying here is that, despite the wide variety of mood and behavioural characterizations - neurologically - they all ultimately originate from one of two binary actions:

    1) excitation

    2) depression.

    i.e. neural signals up, or neural signals down.

    This shows a neuron with vs without a sheath called myelin (it was intended to demonstrate the quality of the electricity when myelin integrity is good).

    But the point is the clip shows electrical propagation through the cell.

    This is the "signal" or "action potential", "neural spike", "excitatory spike".


    It's essentially the fundamental "binary process" of our behaviour.

    1) So when those spikes propagate frequently and powerfully = "excitation".

    2) Slow and weak (or not at all) = "depression".

    In neurological terms.


    When we extend/extrapolate that outwards to our behaviour/presentation

    • good excitation = having fun, feeling positive, "positive vibe", high energy, good concentration, healthy, attractive, laughter.
    • depression = weak, slow, lethargic, poor concentration, weak "vibe", unattractive energy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    The pivotal question being, what determines good healthy excitation, or weak and regressive depression of neural signalling (and therefore behavior, mood, presentation, functionality, intellect, physical ability)?

    Historically the "nature-nurture" contention has been a means to determine this outcome.

    i.e. a genotype -> undergoes environmental influences, developing accordingly -> to dictate the outcome.

    But the reality is that does not necessarily represent an effective intervention.


    Chemical signalling modifiers (chemicals/drugs) are just that, they modify chemical signals downstream of electrical spikes, therefore no real revolutionary impact on the genuine nature of the neurological system.

    The ultimate determinant of the neural system being, it operates and adapts according to the organisms sentience.

    It's sense of self-awareness.

    i.e. the quality of how it thinks.


    In modern day terms relative to one situation or the next, situational management, establishing enhanced or modified thought process to increase or improve situational management is characterized as,


    ......... and this is where I'm hoping the connect between neurological/physiological function and psychology becomes more readily apparent.

    i.e. how we think, how we process thought and emotion -> most acute determinant of neuro/physiological well being, and therefore of performance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush


    So we're at the point of having established "cognition" as being the optimal intervention to render the optimal function and productive outcome (optimal excitation = optimal neural function = optimal self/situational awareness, neural capacity and associated decision making).

    • So, we must define cognition.

    Thoughts -> emotions -> actions.

    • Cognition = intervention at the level of thoughts, consciously/"cognizantly" implementing thoughts to cascade down that chain of events and ultimately affect our behavior/actions.

    Emphasizing that what we're ultimately going for is optimization of PERFORMANCE.

    Thus optimization of neural electricity (determinant of CNS performance).

    That is to say, optimization of EXCITATION. (in a sense the optimal counter-measure to regressive neural-depression or down-regulation of electricity).

    i.e. a cognitive intervention to render this.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    The externalized presentations society conventionally deems imperative to functionality are, social, emotional, behavioral....... and lesser spoken/acknowledged, sexual.

    So essentially the molecular neurology of the process is covered quiet well above;

    Now trying to tie in more specifically to the extrapolation of the neurology - the psychology.

    Conventional psychology isn't my forte - cognitive science and neurology relative to performance is - but as I understand the two are not entirely dissimilar.

    So from a "psychology" view point I understand the quotation would be considered "Freudian".


    Many don't like that so much as it focuses on the topic which is always awkward to discuss - sexuality.

    So, social, emotional, behavioral, and sexual - they're the presentations that are externally apparent, that we judge others on.

    But let's face it, BY FAR the core driving impetus, is sexual........ (cont)


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush


    So how does this (sexuality) tie in with Cognition?

    As above, cognition is intervention at the level of thoughts, to ultimately affect behavior, actions, by extension personality, and performance.

    • As with consistent cognitive application, impacted emotional affect - mediated in neurology (and by extension gene expression),
    • Essentially we biologically adapt to our cognitive state, the cognitive intervention.
    • A form of "morphology", we become more functional and proficient human beings.
    • Could also characterize it simply as, "development".

    The form of therapy CBT, cognitive behavior therapy is kind of evidence of this. It's as I understand, working with a therapist to determine a cognitive intervention (self rationalization relative to a difficult situation which perhaps one was having difficulty coping with), which ultimately impacts our feelings/emotions in that situation, therefore affects the outcome - how we behave:

    Thus how we manage or perform in that situation.


    So quite simply relative to sexuality - sexual performance is based on "excitation" of ones partner, mediated in nerve stimulation.

    i.e. sexual orgasm, pleasure associated with such is simply signalling of the nervous system, pleasure transmitter like beta-endorphin, endogenous opioids, dopamine, etc.

    These are discharged through stimulation of nerve-excitation (powerful action potentials), these:

    a feeling - cause by behavioral excitation.

    Thus sensory stimulation by way of visual observation, "vibe", as above, etc. = responsible for physical/sexual attraction.

    And the effective intervention to positively impact this outcome = Cognition (intervening in the thoughts-emotions-actions cascade, at the level of thoughts).


    So in a sense, optimizing our neuro and physiological performance (thus sports performance)

    = dependent on optimizing our potential sexual performance.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    ....... if that final sentence doesn't capture someones attention and stimulate some interaction/replies well, I don't know what......

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    What it will then ultimately come down to,

    And the effective intervention to positively impact this outcome = Cognition (intervening in the thoughts-emotions-actions cascade, at the level of thoughts).

    .... is what is this?

    How does one implement such a cognitive intervention?

    Well intervening at the level of how we think is essentially self instruction.

    i.e. cognitive intervention = self instruction (self rationalization, basically what all of us do all the time, 6:54 of following clip with Noam Chomsky, language is the basis for internal thought, but thus far in evolutionary terms, used only with questionable efficacy)

    Thus the general cognitive-science contention that, language itself is the core defining property of what makes us human:

    Language is the basis of cognition (functionality, being civilized, evolution, situational management, intellect, defining property of a culture, etc.)

    • The quality of our internal/thought/rationalization/self-instruction - our cognition - therefore determines the quality of our neural excitation, quality of our nervous system, and acts as the determinant of our performance, most notably sexual.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    By example, I believe it was Mark Twain that said "we're animals that teach ourselves to be human".

    This is conventionally done through institutions.

    The family institution.

    Educational institutions.

    Religious and cultural institutions.

    But because of the interaction of each "teaching environment" with each individual genotype........ results vary.

    Not to mention the counter intuitive and paradoxical nature of

    • human behavior
    • nerve stimulation/excitation
    • sexuality

    is not encapsulated well/at-all in any institution.


    In any case, the mechanism of "teaching ourselves to be more human" again, occurs at the level of "thoughts", internal rationale, self-instruction, cognition - in the thoughts-emotions-actions progression.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Nerve activity determines our feeling (what we feel in our body/mind/"soul" is the cumulative effect of neural spikes throughout our physiological system).

    We're aiming to increase/optimize that = optimal functionality, performance, health and well being.

    That is to say, we're increasing excitation.


    The principle of behavioral excitation follows the exact principle of neural excitation at a molecular level.

    • Hyperpolarization
    • Depolarization
    • = generates electrical flow, "excitation".

    Behaviorally (actions) is no different.

    Therefore emotionally, is no different (emotions).

    Therefore the thought implementation or cognition must reflect this principle = to cause this affect (thoughts).

    • Thoughts - emotions - actions framework.

    i.e. thought-implementation or cognition = emotion based, specifically to cause/induce a hyperpolarization and subsequent depolarization affect in others (excite/stimulate them).

    i.e. our behavior/"vibe" ultimately reflects this (subsequent to sufficient biological adaptation/morphology by way of the cognitive implementation), having this affect.

    This is the basis for potentially optimizing sexual stimulation/gratification in others/sexual-partners - optimizing nerve stimulation.

    Where optimization of nerve-activity/stimulation = the basis for optimal health/well-being and physiological performance, in us.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    In short:

    • The cognitive state such that our behavior adapts to being optimal at sex (which would be the core driving impetus to implement such a cognitive state in the first place....... FOMO etc., and acts as the focus/purpose of said cognitive application) =
    • The exact cognitive state which renders optimal physiological function, thus athletic performance, health and well being.
    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Let me just punctuate these contentions with a short clips from Trinity's Ian Robertson.

    Focus on

    • cognition,
    • self instruction,
    • excitation,
    • performance and
    • physiological responses:

    Time stamped to be concise but worth rewinding to watch the entire clip.


    In this case he's applying a cognitive state/intervention, as per the clip.

    Whilst any cognitive application is better than none, this particular one is not really going to be massively sustainable, or really lend itself to world class, revolutionary health and physiological benefits, and it's unlikely to dramatically impact downstream gene-expression giving rise to any meaningful biological morphology.

    But the point is, identification of cognitive intervention, to boost neural signalling (which translate as feeling/"mood" of excitation - which boosts performance).

    So this particular cognitive intervention isn't massively advanced, but it's the general approach/concept being acknowledged, is why I found it interdasting.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    So what it comes down to is elevation (/optimization) of thought process.

    Thinking cognitively (but critically understanding what the cognitive process is, relative to humans - emotion).

    This implicates neural function = implicates behaviour/actions/performance.


    Considering the emphasis humanity currently places on how we think?

    It's the basis for a culture, the basis for revolutions, the basis for societal function, government coups.

    Instating thought processes or conflicting ideology in relation to functional/sustainable thought processes is obviously an ongoing global issue.

    To give people freedom to think as they wish;

    As quite simply this determines how society grows and flourishes, life direction, personal well being.

    All defined by how we think.


    Optimal cognitive thought = optimal self-awareness/presence-of-mind = optimal functionality/performance.

    And in many respects this equates to optimal economic performance as of course economic well being is based on performance of the work force.

    So starting at the macro, the molecular, the concept extrapolates essentially to personal, interpersonal, societal, cultural, national, and global.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Revising (really reducing the explanation to the core concepts):

     - Primary source of excitation (mediated in neural action potentials) = getting laid (that oh-so-difficult-and-awkward topic to address).

    Therefore, cognition (self instruction, mediated in language) which facilitates this optimally = facilitate optimal excitation, therefore optimal well being, CNS activity.

    - This is all mediated in emotion (as excitation is) = cognitive application is all based in emotional relevance.

    i.e. emotional self instruction.

    Thoughts/emotions/actions - optimal thought framework application, which is of emotional relevance, rendering the optimal behavioral outcome:

    Built to facilitate getting laid, optimally, thoroughly (no faking), with optimal gratification.


    Now humanity is about more than just "getting laid"; we're about cultivation, evolution, innovation etc etc.

    But this is the core driving influence and motivator (despite us pretending it's not, all the time), the fuel to our machine (that which is responsible for firing up our CNS).

    The only legit person I've heard openly and publicly acknowledge this is Dr Ciara Kelly of Newstalk-breakfast.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 331 ✭✭ Bicyclette

    The area you are looking at is Neuropsychology. Like another poster here, I have an undergraduate degree in psychology and studied neuropsychology as part of that degree. However I now work in a completely different field.

    Question, are you trying to develop a new theory/hypothesis here? Or what are you trying to do? I'm getting a bit bogged down in all of your posts.

    Neurons firing is one thing but you need to look at what is triggering the firings. And that is the chemical balances and reactions. The activity within neurons is based on the chemical balance within the membrane of the neuron and once it reaches a certain threshold, only then will it fire. In terms of the synaptic interactions, again this is chemical.

    Depression had been portrayed as a serotonin deficit caused by either lack of serotonin or a malabsorption issue which is why the modern anti-depressants are SSRIs Serotonin Specific Reuptake Inhibitors - i.e. they allow the serotonin circulate for longer in the synapses. However a recent study is casting doubt on this theory. In any of the literature I had read (and I'm out of the loop a while now) they didn't fully understand the mechanisms.

    Recent research is also looking at Gut Biome and mood. Studies have shown that there are correlations between mood and gut biome. And that the bacteria in our gut biome can affect far more than our digestive systems.

    Its great that you are reading and interested in the area. But you need to read some of the journal articles. Read the research which has already been done.

    (And I was just in to look at the weather when I saw your post, I don't normally go to the psychology forum)

  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    are you trying to develop a new theory/hypothesis here? Or what are you trying to do?

    Not exactly. As per the video clip, cognitive intervention isn't exactly a new concept. But optimization of it, that's what I'm contending.

    Some of what I'm presenting with lacks absolute definition such as, our thoughts are mediated/transmit-through our neural system, therefore to essentially reverse-engineer that dynamic, we can implicate/affect our neural system by specific "cognitive"/thought-process intervention (self-awareness, taking control of what we're thinking - thus how we behave, how we're "cultivating" ourselves, in some respects our own development and gene expression, morphology).

    As to neuropsychology, the researcher in that specific field I have followed is Heather Berlin of Mt Sinai, whose specific focus is characterized as "impulse control".

    As our reflex/impulsive responses are again mediated through neural-action potentials, what I'm contending is basically an intervention in that capacity, to regulate and ultimately optimize said "impulses" - which is encapsulated in behavior.

    Neurons firing is one thing but you need to look at what is triggering the firings. And that is the chemical balances and reactions. The activity within neurons is based on the chemical balance within the membrane of the neuron and once it reaches a certain threshold, only then will it fire. In terms of the synaptic interactions, again this is chemical

    The chemical basis of neural firing, ion flux, action potential propagation is covered ad nauseum in the previous 19 or so posts.

    In terms of the interaction between our psychology, how we think, our cognitive state, self-awareness, and how that interacts with or precipitates "excitation" (the aforementioned "neural firing"), the actual physiological basis of that...... again I believe it's due to reverse-engineering the thoughts-mediated-in-neural-activity dynamic.

    Depression had been portrayed as a serotonin deficit caused by either lack of serotonin or a malabsorption issue which is why the modern anti-depressants are SSRIs Serotonin Specific Reuptake Inhibitors - i.e. they allow the serotonin circulate for longer in the synapses. However a recent study is casting doubt on this theory. In any of the literature I had read (and I'm out of the loop a while now) they didn't fully understand the mechanisms.

    Yes..... this is kind of the conventional hypothesis of "depression", mood based depression. That's at least part of what I'm trying to define.

    If you look "upstream" of serotonin discharge from the axon-terminal, what is it that causes those storage vesicles to bind to the cellular membrane and discharge the chemical into the synapse for subsequent signalling?

    It's the "neural spike", the electrical bolt, neuron firing..... whatever you want to call it.

    In terms of the definition of "depression", what I'm CONTENDING is, it's insufficient neural spikes are the TRUE denominator.

    i.e. "depressed" or lowered neural spikes -> not enough serotonin release. SSRI's cleverly circumvent this by blocking re-absorption.

    But what if there was an intervention where instead of needing to block re-absorption, we could simply stimulate or increase release?

    = increase exocytosis, excitatory release - mediated in neural-spikes.


    That's the point, neural spikes themselves - THEY are the feeling of excitation.

    Thus, cognitively increase the FEELING OF EXCITATION, the actual "mood" of being excited (see again clip of Ian Robertson above) = increase neural spikes = increase signal/chemical (such as serotonin) discharge = improved mood/functionality/performance.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Read the research which has already been done

    In what specific area?

    Development (/neurodevelopment), performance, emotional process, relationships, neural degeneration, neural basis of physiological ailments, contentions behind aging and associated decline in performance, cognitive science, neurobiology, societies/cultures, response/reaction times mediated in neural firing/signalling?


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    I'll just draw a line under post #24.



    As up to there covers the primary (IMO easy to understand) core-concepts. Here forth is examining knock on implications and specifics.

    Morphology, modification of signal pathways, genesis.

    Big replicates small, large scales replicates macro scale.

    Entire organism replicates a single cell.

    => behavior replicates the binary denominator in which all behavior is encoded in;

    i.e. behavior replicates a neuron.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

     - Depressed neural firing = when ones thought process proves ineffective at managing challenge, adversity, stress, etc.

    Inability to cope with the responsibility at hand, neural system becomes overwhelmed and slows down = performance suffers.

    Redefine ones thought process by way of cognitive intervention (cognizant/self-aware application of thought) = counter-measure to depression = neural firing enhancement.

    A thought-process which manages the potential burden.

    BUT, all human function, situational management and inter-relational skills occur by way of EMOTION ("vibe", feeling, etc), therefore the ultimate/optimized cognitive intervention is entirely emotion based.

    As emotion determines neural firing, its optimization by default enhances/optimizes neural firing = optimization of physiological performance.

    In specific terms = thought process aimed at increasing neural firing = emotional hypercharge to release

    Emotional hypercharge/hyperpolarization = analogous to "hate".

    Emotional discharge/depolarization = analogous to "love".

    Polar opposites.

    • We can clearly see this replicates the formation of a neural-action potential itself,
    • accumulation of positive/hypercharge (hate, making someone real mad, crazy)
    • subsequent depolarization (release into intimacy, love)
    • = propagation of neural-spike = electricity, excitation (extrapolating to feeling/mood of such)

    That is to say, the optimal cognitive state, that responsible for enhancing neural function -> is an emotional-extrapolation of the nature of a neuron itself.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Emotional hypercharge/hyperpolarization = analogous to "hate".

    Emotional discharge/depolarization = analogous to "love".

    Polar opposites.

    I had mentioned early that, social/emotional/behavioral but most critically and most often ignored, sexual - are the primary outward presentations determining health and well being, positive function.

    Well the reality is, sexual is the one most of us pay attention most acutely to, but paradoxically pretend it's what we're almost oblivious to.

    As we can see from the quotation, the emotional progression, a high emotional hypercharge and subsequent release/depolarization, lends itself to an explosive sexual outcome.

    Therefore, it acts as a phenomenal motivator of the nervous system and human behavior in general.

    Again, this being the most acute and optimized approach enhancing the performance outcome.

    This was the contention I posited early in that, optimization of sexual performance by our primary means to do so, emotionally-relevant cognitive-intervention, thought-intervention = by default the means to optimize physio/neurological performance.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Emotional polarity = hypercharge to discharge/release.

    This is the fundamental principle of electrical generation.

    Increasing electrical potential of the nervous system therefore = performance increase = cognitive focus on induction of polarity.

    i.e. make someone "crazy" (sometimes characterized as "hate") then facilitate their expression of such (done into intimacy, sometimes characterized as "love") = extremely gratifying release.

    This is the core principle of sexual gratification.

    Very overlooked and misunderstood in contemporary society.


    Therefore in relation to performance specifically, increasing the electrical potential of the CNS is based on becoming more sexually proficient - based in being more/optimally emotionally proficient;

    Which renders optimal behavior.

    Are these posts too "wordy", does this make the least amount of sense to anyone?

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    In relation to a presentation lending itself to emotional polarity (by way of cognitive intervention);

    I guess another means to characterize this would be, attitude.

    As in, "I don't like your attitude".

    Perhaps not dissimilar to how many people don't like Conor McGregor's attitude (though he is a world famous sports star).

    And of course some people love him.

    i.e. polarizing.


    Otherwise may be characterized as "personality" in a sense?

    The base purpose is performance enhancement, physical, intellectual and therefore situational/interpersonal.

    Underwriting performance situationally, attitude I guess is something we historically consider central to that, ability re people management.

    And ultimately, attitude = the affect we have on how others feel,

    i.e. emotional affect - by way of cognitive based emotional-intervention.

    Optimizing that = optimal attitude.


  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    Cause of aging?

    The brash attitude of youth is not sustainable into adulthood?

    Attitude determines how others respond to and feel toward us, i.e. their emotional response. So attitude = emotional disposition; all rooted in emotion.

    i.e. addressing aging, is addressing evolution of attitude to maintain the vibrancy and fun, but being capable for the responsibility and demand......... to perform.

    So obviously many diseases are associated with age, neural degeneration.

    Action-potential frequency and potency reduction.

    EXCITATION reduction ("I feel excited" - attempt at establishing a counter measure, stimulating neural excitation/firing).

    It seems this is an approach at getting "fired up", that feeling of being revved up, improves mood, neural activity = increases performance.

    Some contend aging is associated with genetic markers like telomerase reduction (trials on associated drugs thus far lacking true efficacy).

    Accumulation of flaws in gene-expression, mitochondrial disfunction - all mediated through the core concept of a neuron, an excitatory cell - excitation, the electrical spike.

    Increasing neural excitation can only be done cognitively, maximizing our sentience, self awareness.

    Like what Prof Robertson is saying, "I feel excited", firing up our neurons so they can cope with stress and demand, but determining a means to create this sustainably, and potentially optimally (requires high level of abstraction - this is where open mindedness comes into the fold - BIG TIME!!).

    To me this is the only way forward.

    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 985 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush


    This post is kind of, validation behind the entire concept as it's basically coming from a legit authority figure, endorsement as to the potential efficacy of performance related cognitive application.

    That's the point to remember.


    So what he's saying is, "before you perform, instruct yourself as such, and your performance will be better".

    And said instruction is, "I feel excited".


    So what one could intuitively deduce from such a statement - "I feel excited" - is, it gets you fired up, ready to go, ready for action, flares up neural firing and you're ready to take on a serious task because a higher functioning nervous system can cope with higher stressors and taxation.

    With me so far?


    Is it sustainable?

    Could you go about all day every day and saying to yourself, "I feel excited", to elicit improved/optimal performance?

    Would that expression affect the CNS on a consistent basis, or would it possibly work, a minority of the time, and then fade and ultimately you'd be confronted with other complexities a stressful situation presents with and be left wondering how to manage them?


    Therefore, we're taking Prof Robertsons contention, "I feel excited" as a means to fire up the nervous system, and we're going to adhere to the concept of what he's doing, but slightly modify the approach.


    Post edited by Sugar_Rush on