Www.biposuisse.ch G. Treviranus,BipoSuisse c/0 pratice FMH psychiatry psychotherapy CH 3012 Berne dyn My delight is your torment. Extending the Aristotelian
www.biposuisse.ch G. Treviranus,BipoSuisse c/0 pratice FMH
psychiatry psychotherapy CH 3012 Berne dyn My delight is your
torment. Extending the Aristotelian syllogistic TAMdyn4-generator
of natural language terms to 64 relations. On mismatch of
(Un)Certainty- orientation and many others. Joint WPA-INA-HSRPS
International Psychiatric Congress. Athens 30.10./2.11. 14 Free
communciations - EDESSA l exical geometry logic of meaning
Approriation cycles Unleashed reason creates monsters: el sueo de
la razon Goya
Slide 2
Socrates after asking too many questions l exical geometry
logic of meaning Approriation cycles
Slide 3
Why parsimony? We can only think in 4 dimensions. (the rest is
intuition, i.e. movement brain) So, lets try GEOMETRY
Slide 4
() misconceptions (..,) may prove very grave hindrances to the
understanding of the concatenation of things (...) although human
bodies in many respects agree, yet in very many others they differ;
so that what seems good to one seems bad to another; what seems
well ordered to one seems confused to another; what is pleasing to
one displeases another, and so on. () brains differ as completely
as palates. Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza The Book of Ethics, Appendix,
1677 Spinoza: a geometry of differing brain states l exical
geometry logic of meaning Approriation cycles
Slide 5
J:tAM F:tAm N:tam D:TaM W:Tam THOUGT-ACTION-MOOD dynTAM corners
= triples of THOUGT-ACTION-MOOD P:TAM B: t aM I:TAm encoded as 8
emo-terms encoded as classical triples (0 1|THOUGHT |0 1| ACTION |0
1)MOOD (t T| THOUGHT |a A| ACTION |m M) MOOD e.g.: Tam (1 | 0 | 0 )
D - DISPAIR lexical geometry 1.3 lower case = 0 UPPER case = 1
Slide 6
APPROPRIATION WAVE (formerly approach wave) & the TAM-cube
dyn4 Treviranus 2005 1.A phase space of ATTRACTORS and PROCESSES
between them. SPEED MASS momentum Mood regulation in bipolar
disorders viewed through the pendulum dynamics concept Elias
Koutsoukos, Elias Angelopoulos International Journal of Bipolar
Disorders 2014, 2:9 (17 June 2014)
Slide 7
Differed ACTION Level of OBJECTS & FACTS Level of OBJECTS
& FACTS Level of the BEINGS Level of the BEINGS JP Janets kinds
of consent (OKs): coupling language action & degrees of REALITY
Control KNOWLEDGE Level of TRUTH Level of TRUTH OK after DOUBT = =
reasoining Assertive BELIEF Reflected BELIEF Immediate ACTION
Hierachy of ACTIONS Psychological Operations Ideation Verbal
formula Hierarchy of LANGUAGES Logic Rational BELIEF Zone NO
REALITY Zone NO ACTION OK after DOUBT = deliberation Reflected WILL
Immediate OK Idea Immediate WILL immediate ----OK T - axis modif.
www.janet.fr A - axis Hierarchies of REALITY COUO CERTAINTY? Zone
NO ??? ACTION JP Janet T A
Slide 8
Dominant Submissive Relationship (DSR) Paradigm for bipolar
disorder: (Price 1967, Gardner 1982) Ewa Malatynska, Richard J.
Knapp Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews (2005) rats: 50% form
clear DSR vs. 50%+ form flexible DSR Dominance (Soldatos... !)
regulate - group defense against unfavorable outside - within-group
aggression - population size Submission behavior - avoids severe
fighting wounds - oistrakos (expulsion)
Slide 9
Predominant polarity: MD, Md, Dm (Angst 1978) (= e.g. 2/3 of
time by retrospective evaluation) PredPol (predominant polarity) is
found in 50% of BPAD, PredPol M(ania) at onset: more in the young,
psychotic, substance abusers MANIA (but not hypomania) separates
from MDD in terms of familial transmission challenges a common
diathesis (Merikangas et al., 2013; Vandeleur et al., 2013).
PredPol D(epression) at onset: in depressive BPAD-2, suicide
Through WEEKLY ratings BPAD-1 and -2 are mainly DEPRESSSED (Judd
2002-2005, Roy-Byrne 1985) PredPol M vs. Predpol D: Equal! or just
seemingly so bc. no full 3D-TAM diagnostics are done? : m=f,
Seasonality, Rapid Cycling, Comorbidity : axis I (ocd...), axis II
(personality disorder... ), Affective temperament More in PredPol
D: Mixity factor {anx, tense, suic, motor, excit} (Pacchiarotti
2013) Journal of Affective Disorders(2014) Predominant polarity:
MD, Md, Dm (Angst 1978) (= e.g. 2/3 of time by retrospective
evaluation) PredPol (predominant polarity) is found in 50% of BPAD,
PredPol M(ania) at onset: more in the young, psychotic, substance
abusers MANIA (but not hypomania) separates from MDD in terms of
familial transmission challenges a common diathesis (Merikangas et
al., 2013; Vandeleur et al., 2013). PredPol D(epression) at onset:
in depressive BPAD-2, suicide Through WEEKLY ratings BPAD-1 and -2
are mainly DEPRESSSED (Judd 2002-2005, Roy-Byrne 1985) PredPol M
vs. Predpol D: Equal! or just seemingly so bc. no full 3D-TAM
diagnostics are done? : m=f, Seasonality, Rapid Cycling,
Comorbidity : axis I (ocd...), axis II (personality disorder... ),
Affective temperament More in PredPol D: Mixity factor {anx, tense,
suic, motor, excit} (Pacchiarotti 2013) 40% BPAD-2 with
antidepressants get 1 (or +) mixed episode Agitated depression is
tAm Kraepelin / Weygandt Pinel Falret(s) IF Anxiety is present,
it's ANXIOUS MANIA (TAm) Not like Koukopoulos, Marneros
Slide 10
What sort of dimensions are these? Private More Conscious 4-D
(Cartesian) in working memory Symbols & operators governing
TIME (models events on time arrow, vague schedule) Best model =
which????? THINK ACT Public behavior Less Conscious 5+-Dimensional
in movement brain Intuition governing DISTANCE movement (moves
multi-link- chains, vocal chords..) Best distance = easy?
Slide 11
The dyn4-cube for FAMILY CIRCUMPLEX 1 ANALYSIS modo David H.
Olson (1989) THOUGHTACTIONMOODFlexibility (of models)Cohesion (when
strained)Communication (affective responsiveness) Leadership
PROBLEM SOLVING Changes of rules & roles Discipline Closeness
AFFILIATION Loyalty Dependency Facilitates 2Qualitative
1Quantitative CHANGE Flexibility CHAOTIC FLEXIBLE STRUCTURED
RIGIDCohesion ENMESHED CONNECTED SEPARATED DISENGAGEDCommunication
FACILITATING CHANGE No facilitation either or : passage -x to
x
Slide 12
AmbitendentialTHOUGHT [about ACTION]! A false, B false A true,
B true AB: allowed ab: forbidden One has to be T Two the same F One
has to be F Two not the same Two the same
Slide 13
Fear tAm: LL( (-X) NEVER(-X) notSom (-X) NEEDtam: LL( X)
NEVER(X) notSom (X) Despair TaM: Som ( -X) THOUGT-ACTION-MOOD LOGIC
triples of THOUGT-ACTION-MOOD PURSUIT TAM: Som (-X) BLISS taM:
LL(X) NEVER( X) notSom ( X) MOOD up : Aufhebung X X -X ACTION
requires Distance: +X (either or) -X =APPROACH WORRY Tam: Som ( X)
INTEREST Tam: Som ( X) THOUGHT : universal ( ) particular ( ) Joy
tAM: LL(-X)
Slide 14
Fear tAm: LL( (-X) NEVER(-X) notSom (-X) NEEDtam: not one thing
is as it should be notSom (X) Despair TaM: Som is not Approachable:
cant stay like that! THOUGT-ACTION-MOOD LOGIC triples of
THOUGT-ACTION-MOOD PURSUIT TAM: Som needs approach BLISS taM: LL is
as it should be MOOD up : Aufhebung X X -X ACTION requires
Distance: +X (either or) -X =APPROACH WORRY Tam: Som ( X) Some.. is
not as it should be INTEREST Tam: Why Som is special? THOUGHT:
universal ( ) particular ( ) Joy tAM: LL approaches
Slide 15
Slide 16
Slide 17
What if its not just me? We can look at all possible couplings
of discrete states of 2 AUTOMATA on trajectories in the TAM phase
space So again, lets try Social Psychology and GEOMETRY
Slide 18
Person A PERCEPT: ( by OBSERVING Person B move PERCEPT A : (A B
T A ) ACTOR INFERES ( T A ) about attributes of ACTOR B WHETHER
ACTOR a.The ACTOR B anticipates public OUTCOME: T A (T B (A B {A B
T (A) }) ACTOR b.The ACTOR B intends OUTCOME: T A ( T B A B ) ACTOR
c.The ACTOR B can act / acts to achieve OUTCOME: T( A B ) ACTOR is
(not) pleased during M(a./b./c.) d. The ACTOR B is (not) pleased
during M(a./b./c.) e. The ACTOR INGRATIATOR e. The ACTOR B intends
OC altruistically for PERSON As benefit A OR f. as an INGRATIATOR
for his own future exchange benefit.. or REPUTATION Edward
Ellsworth Jones (1926-1993) Doing social psychology we get e.g.: To
this we may add e.g.: Coined ingratiator
Slide 19
PERCEPT: ( ACTOR Person A by OBSERVING Person B: PERCEPT A : (A
B T A ) inferes about (attributes to) ACTOR B WETHER ACTOR a.The
ACTOR B anticipates OUTCOME: T (A {A T (A) }) ACTOR b.The ACTOR B
intends OUTCOME: T(T A) ACTOR c.The ACTOR B can act / really acts
to achieve OUTCOME ACTOR is (not) pleased during M(a./b./c.) d.The
ACTOR B is (not) pleased during M(a./b./c.) e.The ACTOR e.The ACTOR
B intends OC for PERSON As benefit A (..) in social psychology:
(..) SEE behavior as caused by 1)a stable personal DISPOSITION of
ACTOR & RISK fundamental attribution error ( 1).
ACTOR(TEMPERAMENT: M X T A) ACTOR x (TEMPERAMENT: M X T A) OR to
more than adequate SITUATIONal pressures 2) a natural response to
more than adequate SITUATIONal pressures. E.E. Jones, Interpersonal
Perception, 1990 & RISK actorobserver bias ( 2) (mostly in
SELF-evaluation) ACTOR(PERCEPT: A T) ACTOR x (PERCEPT: A T) Edward
Ellsworth Jones (1926-1993) INGRATIATION OR (3) BIPOLAR
DISORDER
entrainment cornering cooperation sadism ignition All
communication is SENT through an active TAM {.A.} state. Here
RECEPTION in TAM {.A.} states are shown Person A feels whilst
Person B feels sadism cornering ? To do
Slide 29
hunting empathic joy envy / jealousy thrill Hunting thrill /
Schadenfreude admiration Person A feels Person B in respect to
Person B NOT enjoying: L: 2nd envious R: 1st embarassed
Slide 30
envy / jealousy / Person A feels Person B in respect to Person
B admiration embarassment you really want me to say something Pride
Bs status too low for unmerited entitlement: feels embarassed
Laurence Fishburne 1995 Gricault Lenvie envy jealousy
Slide 31
hunting thrill Person A feels Person B in respect to Person B
Group fear Nightmaresfearfactory.com Group dispair Raqqa Media
Center IS Les Misrables
Slide 32
tA TA Modo Oldsen Finer 1...4 graduation of T&A
Slide 33
Slide 34
Slide 35
Slide 36
JOY INTEREST UC-UNCERTAINTY- ORIENTATION JOY INTEREST RAGE
CO-CERTAINTY- ORIENTATION
Slide 37
UC-UNCERTAINTY- ORIENTATION DOPAMIN +++ OPIATES +++ APPROACH-
Wave Sorrentino RM, Roney CJR. The uncertain mind. Individual
differences in facing the unknown. Essay in social psychology.
Philadelphia:Psychology Or, 1999 UC have more Dopamine
Slide 38
A framework for concrete analysis The THOUGHT ACTION MOOD
dyn4-model of appropriation waves within a phase space is nr.1 of 3
attempts I undertake to make a framework, and hereby an abstract,
but progressively concrete sense out of my own (& different
peoples) experience with: My(them)selves, mood &
courage-disordered patients, politics, and neuroscience. My other 2
attempts are lobbying: 2) for person-centered configural frequency
analysis (CFrA) statistics (which would restore persons in
statistics) 3) for a central role of mast cells in neuropsychiatry.
These 3 threads interact: thalamic mast cells could influence
cortico-BG-loops generating T,A & M-like data apt for
CFrA.
