🚀 go-pugleaf

A very interesting and disquieting possibility that definitely must 
not
be taken lightly is the existence of telepathy and higher cognition
abilities in animals. The fact that all brains are inherently
electrical devices suggests this possibility. It is recognized that 
the
brain enjoys the property of plasticity, that is, it can readapt by
`reprogramming` the neural activation patterns that constitute its
processing faculty both to learn and to make up for the constant 
dying
and damage of neurones. It doesn`t make sense, from an evolutive 
point
of view, to have `tight` brains, brains that contain just the minimum
necessary mass to accomplish their purpose; it would be far more
economical to embed that knowledge in fixed, `mechanical`
constructions, for instance, the automatic retina dilation to adjust 
to
light. Living beings with tight brains would be at a disadvantage
compared to beings having reseve capacity for *a given niche*. That
additional capacity would habilitate them to learn and to keep 
working
activation patterns despite the efects of the medium (medium here
including the accumulation of free radicals in the organism). This
means that even small brains have leeway to cope with unforseen
circumstances, as is evidenced by rats being able to learn maze
traversing abilities.

But What about big brains, like those of lions, dolphins, whales,
rhinocerous, gorillas, etc? This animals are not credited with 
thinking
nor speech, but there must be taken into account two facts: the lack 
of
adequate organs to emit articulated sounds (a BIG disadvantage even 
for
humans with throat lesions), and the ability of brains (as receivers)
to *magnetize*, that is, to accept the stimulation of stable neural
activation patterns by the sheer circumstance of receiving those
signals (in other terms, the electric field that constitutes the 
output
of a brain gets combed). This would enable animals to achieve at 
least
basic speech abilities that would be impossible to evidence vocally,
but that through the radio channel of the brain would be obvious. 
Given
also that animals lack hands and therefore don`t have to dedicate
processing power to control such multipurpose manipulators, the
additional brain capacity be devoted to trigger the kind of neural
activations that are associated with language, speech and 
specifically
telepathic communication...

112.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Jan 31 2005, 2:04 pm
This phenomenon may well be the reason for the early shamanic and 
other
religious cults centering in adoring animals, in eras when our 
species
was still closer to irrationality than to the more elaborate 
functions
of Reason: morality (good and evil), art, mathematics. The effect of
animal minds simultaneously receiving the influence of human language
as it was developed and exercising their influence (a sort of
siumltaneous determination like that of algeraic systems), may well 
be
the reason and real meaning of the now lost `state of harmony with
nature`. These forgotten facts would have carried out throughout th
ages while the species as a whole, without persitent records to
remember and the lack of conceptual tools to explain, gradually lost
thenatural ability or relegated it to the domain of religion. At some
point, probably with the acquisition of writing in its diverse forms,
the real origin of these early shamanic cults was forgotten, giving
rise eventually to the antropomorphic myths and finally to 
monotheism.
Early forms of common language would have been lost while the higher
semantic and linguistic abilities of our species developed, leaving
behind the limited possibilities of species lacking the influence of
toolmaking to guide the development pf their brains. Once lost common
frames of reference and intuitive understanding (after discovering
harvesting probably, just before domestication), the influence of 
both
teepathy and, to call it somehow, animal empathy, would have 
dminished
to the point of being relegated to trance experiences, myth and
superstition.

But with the great biological success of th species in terms of
populatio size, the sheer size and ,agnitude of th signals would be
able to influence groups of animals or specific species to the point
that the common ground was recovered,this time in human terms, but
whithout the previous recognition of the telepathic ability 
(considered
magic or `special`), leading to a situation where the mere 
possibility
of human-animal mind communication is either considered fantasy,
science fiction or mere `wishful thinking`. Yet it is the number of
humans and the accumulated effect of our activity and the signals
produced by our brains what would again enable at least certain 
species
to recover the link and even acquire basic reasoning and linguc
functions (particularly if we understand that language is in essence 
a
combinatorial exercise where meaning is extracted both from the
consensus regarding the reference framework as well as the 
relationship
between speech elements, that is, context, the way it is understood 
in
transformational [non context-free] grammars). From this perspective,
so called irrational animals would be able to manipulate meaningful
enough phrases and sentences as to provide a certain level of
communication, but without achieving the deep understanding that two
human minds can establish. This scenario would further explain the 
more
damaging effects of schizophrenia in human beings, when a given 
ability
may be able to tune certain signals and discard another; partial or
incomplete telepathic ability would be more damaging than full
transmission if it tunes to the incomplete and almost meaningless 
(echo
signals) from lower species animals, much like parrots repeat phrases
without being really adequate to context (a parrot with a big brain,
maybe within the possibilities of current genetic experimentation,
would be able to establish a meaningful conversation).

Though these statements are logically sound and have some supportive
evidence without having complete proof (which in turn would 
experiment
the same difficulties as trying to prove it with human parties
unwilling to give away their ability), the mere possibility presents
terrifying possibilities once understood its potential. For one, 
lower
species would be unable to really understand our contexts and would
then cause a lot of damage by repeating mindlessly or with not enough
understanding phrases picked up at random, particularly if the effect
of these signals is felt and enacted unconsciously. In a way, we are
their enemies, and basic survival instincts couples with a basic
understanding the problem can very easily lead to basic but effective
strategies, particularly the simple one, maybe acquired through long
time efforts, of triggering self-defeating behaviours. But then it is
also possible that big brains, like those found in ocean animals, 
have
even bigger cognitive abilities than we have, basic or even advanced
understanding of human psychology (what is it that whales sing 
about?)
and telepathic abilities, (though it would be difficult for them to
understand things such as computers, for instance), and their effect 
is
greater than we think of. This phenomenon would be evidenced not in 
the
course of days but would be built throughout centuries, as the sum of
the signals (combing of the field), is propagated throughout the
planet, much in the waythe proponets of Gaia thories explain.
Furthermore, the real possibility of the emergence of distributed
intelligences in small species like insects (ants, bees) or the also
real possibility of long lived forms of consciousnesses as, perhaps,
those formed by chorals and anemonas or bigger life forms lying deep 
in
the ocean (the legend of the kraken), present an even more complex
scenario than currently admitted, which, because our ignorance of it,
has not undergone proper and extensive research, even when it can
account for phenomena such as the sudden downfall of jungle cultures
(mayans, tiahuanacans) and other small area effects.

113.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Feb 1 2005, 5:49 am
It is now known that flock behaviors can be explained without 
recurring
to mechanisms of centralized control, as it is just necessary to 
assume
the existence of basic sets of local (individual`s) rules that when
applied by each individual result in organized, meaningful group
behavior, but this fact does not preclude the existence of other 
forms
of synchronization that would have a clear survival advantage. A
combination of both methods, local rules *and* automatic group
synchronization provide a more accurate and efficient method to
guarantee the survival of a species` group. Thus, local rules can
ensure that birds, fish, antelopes, don`t crash into each other while
fleeing a threat, but the kind of synchronization provided by a
field-like transmission of, lets call them, intentions, would help 
the
group flee in the *same* direction instead of performing a disorderly
escape. This phenomena can be better studied through models taken 
from
slow motion films of animal flocks escaping danger even if the brain
generated electric fields involved are too weak to be detected. The
flow of movement (signal transmission) from the moment an individual
feels danger to the moment when the whole group is organized on the
march can be analyzed to discover whether the individual`s variations
in direction during the initial, disconcerting moment follow a random
pattern or the deviations are too small for a complete application of
local rules. Variables such as the origin of the threat signel 
(smell,
sight, sound) or whether the alarm is given by a member of the group 
or
is external to the group would influence the analysis, but for an
accurate computer emulation of actual films it should be feasible to
generate (synthesize) efficient, simple rules to simulate actual 
group
behavior and test them against sets of rules incorpoating a 
synchronous
mechanism of group decision to assess which of both models better
explains and simulates real life behaviors. A priori, it is easy to 
see
that even a minimum hypothesis of synchronous decision would result 
in
keeping local rules simpler. A big enough study, including life span
tracking of individuals through microchips (if possible), would also
help to assess these phenomena regarding their survival value for the
individual.

114.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Feb 11 2005, 8:46 am
If we acknowledge that at least some drugs lead to
schizophrenia/telepathy and because they are banned likely users are
criminally oriented or frustrated people (homeless) and through
ignorance or fear of being called psychopaths receiving telepaths are
very likely to consider the `messages` as priviledged information or,
worse, don`t ven now consciously that they are receiving messages, it
means that a lot of power is being given to wrong segments of the
population, not to those who would be the most socially responsible 
but
to those who are probably the most resented. Under this hypothesis
telepathy has a adverse social effects for most of the information
would be meaningless or damaging or purposefully used for evil
purposes. Wide acknowledgment of this phenomenon would diminish the 
bad
consecuences of this natural ability, socially speaking.
Fabrizio J Bonsignore, now Danilo J Bonsignore

115.  josephus
View profile
 More options Feb 11 2005, 10:15 am
sigh, Telepathy is not the problem with schizophrenia. proper 
treatment
is. and no I dont think they get proper treatment.
                 josephus

  Reply to author Forward     Rate this post:

116.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com
View profile
 More options Feb 12 2005, 12:51 pm
josephus wrote:
> sigh,
>      Telepathy is not the problem with schizophrenia. proper
treatment
> is. and no I dont think they get proper treatment.
>                  josephus

The working hypothesis is that schizophrenia *is* telepathy as
telepathy is very easily explained by what is known of the brain and
can be corroborated taking into account the social obstacles to its
research, its meaning and taking the working hypohesis as true. What
would be proper treatment? It would be like blinding a person because
he/she can see in the infrarred spectrum. Somebody with that ability
would be able to tell certain illnesses and tell if somebody is
sexually excited or not, giving a slight advantage over the rest of 
the
people to get willing partners, for instance.

117.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Feb 12 2005, 1:25 pm
One disturbing consequence of the last argument is that, granting the
possibility to exercise influence, suggestions or downright control
over others by applying a socially unrecognized phenomenon, and
assuming it is granted by the use of certain drugs, then it would be
the drug addicts
theselves who would be interested in keeping the ban on drugs and
reducing control, since it would give them power over the rest of the
unsuspecting individuals, except for those cases when
schizophrenia/telepathy (maybe should be better termed telepathic
schizophrenia, as real schizophrenia due to defective brains can also
be possible), is either a natural ability or triggered by causes not
associated with drugs, like life threatening conditions, exercise,
meditation, etc.
Another consequence of note would be that, since schizophrenia can be
socially disruptive for the individual, therefore condemning he/she 
to
a dependent lifestyle, such condition would per se generate in the
affected individual social resentment, which can be consciously or 
not
expressed by the negative use of this ability. Besides real
perturbances in the functioning of the individual as a rational, 
social
being, the resented individuals with enough control of their selves 
but
with low socioeconomical positions due to their ability, disregarding
whether those positions are directly or indirectly caused by their
telepathic ability, would be prone to use their ability to *attack*
susceptible individuals, suscetible not only because they are
influenced by hearing or *not hearing* voices but because they 
trigger
the resentement of lowlife telepaths and mentally disturbed 
telepaths,
as can be the case for artists, politicians, scientists, journalists,
in sum, people who are by some or other reason well known by the
public. Such people would be more vulnerable during their first steps
as celebrities, being forgotten after being successfully or
unsuccesfully able to withstand such kind of `psychic` attacks.

This possibility affects interestingly enough the corroborating
hypothesis advanced in `Schizophrenia as Neurosis`, that well known
individuals would experience severe cases of schizophrenia and
disorientation, while less known individuals would only experience
slight or hardly noticed schizophrenias. A self reinforcing, even
self-referential system is thus created in this way:

(some deed) -> celebrity -> attention by telepaths -> ceeb.
schizophrenia -> more deeds -> more celebs. schizophrenia -> ...

til the individual is either destroyed, stops attracting attention or
loses the interest of the mass of bad faith/perturbed telepaths.

It would then be important not only to perform multidisciplinary
scientific studies under the working hypothesis to rove its 
existence,
but also to destroy the social stigma associated to schizophrenia as 
a
destroying illness that *per force* condemns the individual to a life
of failure, loss and poverty the moment it is recognized by him or by
others in him. Breaking the stigma would free individuals to assume
their telepathy and to advance scientific studies without the active
blocking of those having this ability. It would even be worth trying 
to
provide telepathic individuals disabled by working schizohrenias or
condemned as such by recognized schizophrenias with all the 
facilities
of a well jobed life, as a way to reduce their resentement and the
possible bad consequences for the rest of people. This possibility 
can
even be recognized and taken advantage of by dubious interests. 
Indeed,
the possibility to influence by suggestion and at distance 
unsuspecting
individuals can be turned for the better, as it can be used as 
positive
reinforcement instead of negative reinforcement.

Incidentally, well known, growing celebrities can even trigger
`epidemias` of mild to severe schizophrenia if it is taken into 
account
that the attention of multiple individuals thinking at that person
would generate signals strong enough to be received even by otherwise
non teleathic individuals, who again would deny the phenomenon for 
fear
of being sigmatized as `metally ill` people. As always, a repressed
condition can lead itself to other problems, particularly if the
`messages` received are negative and hard to swallow alone, but are
supressed and not discussed as the source is, socially seaking, a
forbidden source...


118.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Feb 12 2005, 1:45 pm
For example, an individual can be destroyed in bad faith by spreading
rumors through this channel and making believe other people false 
facts
about him or her. Bad gossip, til everybody knows *somehow* many 
untrue
facts and lies, creating prejudice and resistance to an otherwise
likeable individual. In the same way an otherwise nonnotorious
individual can become a heroe or a celebrity by spreading good rumors
and congratulations til everybody assumes *somehow* that that
individual is somebody who deserves opportunities. Unfortunately,
resented, envious individuals will tend to spread dirt on people who
would achieve a better station in life than what they can, the more
possibilities being contrarrested with more dirt/

Should some group had realized this possibilities, such group can use
them to advantage to acquire power, as long as the phenomenon is not
widely recognized, both in its possibilities and its dangers. Note 
that
very perturbed individuals with telepathy *and* other illnesses or
crimina propesities such as crime can in this way be manipulated by
clever, self conscious and controlled people to commit crimes in an
absolutely impossible way to track but by recognizing the possibility
and researching through indirect ays. This kind of crimes would only 
be
noticed by the victim and would leave no evidence (!), though they 
can
be uncovered by following strings of coincidences and unexplainable
lucky strains. It should be remembered in this context that telepathy
by its very nature works first of all by thinking *at* the 
individual,
by knowing him beforehand to take advantage of the natural ability of
the brain (in systems, a daemon), to recognize those signals that 
refer
to himself or to know people, the same phenomenon as distinguishing 
our
name over the noise of a party (the bran by itelf would selforganize 
to
keep noise to a minimum to help have attention focused; faiures in 
this
mechanism can lead to really severe and natural forms f 
disabilitating
schizophrenia). This would provide clues as to the intellectual 
actors
of such kind of criminal activity.

119.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Feb 15 2005, 11:51 am

Mass phenomena, even mass movements can be understood by applying the
principle of telepathy to masses. It may be an external impulse,
affecting a conggregation, or it may be an underlying mood,
synchronizing
and starting a self sustaining reaction growing til everybody is out 
of
control or moving in the same direction. It is well known that
individuals might do in a mob what they wouldn`t do alone, their
thought processes very likely synchronized with those around him and
even *overriding* their own thoughts through the sheer force of the
accumulated electric field in charged atmospheres (have you ever
experienced the charged atmosphere of an exam?), lose of control
against the will of the unsuspecting individual.
Given the fact that substances, not necessarily drugs, can enhance 
this
ability (which, by the way, can also be a naturally enhanced trait of 
a
particular population), the Crusades can be explained by recurring to
this hypothesis to explain a sudden mass movement in a historical
moment when communications were hard, yet the masses were suddenly
*synchronized* toward a lemming-like suicide race against a new 
enemy.
Other mass movements, revolutions, wars, that took place in eras
without mass communications may be expression of this ability, a 
likely
explanation of the so call `ripe moment`, when thousands of 
individuals
suddenly decide to exercise violence.

120.  fbonsign...@beethoven.com

Feb 22 2005, 3:34 pm
Paradoxically, the telepathic ability cannot be increased beyond some
point. At some point, if it is too acute, the sheer number of 
messages
the brain is able to decode would swamp comprehension and turn into
mere noise, a babbling cacophony. Also, the length of the messages 
must
be limited, as by its very nature entropy in the signal would make 
the
message become blurred. Since it can be equated, in term of 
processes,
to computing daemons, that is, processess ready to recognize the
beginnin of a signal, once a valid message is recognized as such and 
is
being decoded, the recognizing process would go back to the ready
state, making both the beginning and end of signals difficult to
recognize. Once a message is recognized and decoded it has to be
processed by the conscious processes of the brain, while at the same
time being ready (attentive) to new incoming signals from this source
and other signals from the environment. A very sensitive reception
would swamp the decoding center the same way too many voices in a 
party
give an impression of noise. Though it is easy to recognize owr wn 
name
above a cacophony of voices, doing the same for long messages 
requires
a lot of conscious effort and is, by its very nature, inefficient.
Concetration wouldbe essential, as the shuning of external stimuli,
which is in itself a good description of autism. It can be advanced 
the
hypothesis that autists are very good telepaths, hence their 
withdrawn
attitude (some autists are very good painters, which may be explained
as the ability to receive images and render them in the way a
translucent page can be used to copy an original). A high telepathic
ability would sink the individual in autism and completely disconnect
him from the immediate reality; a less highly developed ability would
result in classic schizophrenia, going down in level from disabling
cacophonies to barely heard whispers to simple `hunches` or sudden
doubts. Yet, the lesser the ability the less information that can be
transmitted through this channel, though long conversations seem to 
be
possible between tuned individuals, as is exemplified frequently by
`schizophrenics` engaged in long one sided speeches with pauses at
intervals that remembers of people speaking through a phone. A more
general, broadcasting or boradreceiving ability seems to be 
impossible
as a communication tool for individuals who are also aware of their
surroundings... Though the principle of diversity in human beings
suggests that several different combinations of reception/
transmission,
sensibility, etc. exist, the usual science fiction picture of the 
total
telepath ability to `read` minds (know the thoughts of somebody else)
can be relegated to the domain of fiction, not only because of the 
need
for a common mapping (language, which makes it necessary for the
emission to travel through the language area in the brain 
[vocalize]),
but also by the need to tune to particular individuals and, maybe,
frequencies. Otherwise, instead of spoken language our main medium 
for
communication would be thought, and since this is not observed and
language was `developed` to communicate complex thoughts, ideas,
situations, the telepathic ability is useful only for short, easily
recognized messages and not for long winded conversations, except
perhaps between exceptional individuals or well known acquaintances,
who besides make a conscious effort to communicate through this
channel. This may be one of the reason why schizophrenia, when
recognized as such is an illness: because of the inability to receive
full messages, therefore leading to misunderstandings and weird
behaviours...

Fabrizio J Bonsignore, now Danilo J Bonsignore